Home  |  About  | Last |  Submit  |  Contact
AllQuests.com



Previous Question:  Windows 7 tweaks for SSDs  Data Storage SystemsNext Question:  Why does RAID make hard drive run faster  Data Storage Systems
Question Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy ( [H]ard|Forum Data Storage Systems )
Updated: 2010-07-21 15:20:36 (99)
Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Considering an SSD, but am wondering when would be the right time to buy. I generally prefer to buy shortly after new technology comes out and replaces old tech.

However, from what I've read, the two well regarded "safe" mid-range SSD purchases are the Intel X25-M and the OCZ Vertex. Of the two, the Intel is supposed to be perform slightly better. My concern is that in the SSD market, which is supposed to be moving very fast, the "best" well regarded semi-mainstream SSD drive is a positively ancient 9 months old now.

Prices have decreased now but I'm a bit concerned that the leader in the mid-range SSD is unchanged for so long. Is there something "significant" that is going to be released in the SSD market soon? When do you guys think is a decent time for a somewhat price concious purchaser to grab an SSD?

Answers: Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy ( [H]ard|Forum Data Storage Systems )
Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmz
Well, of course 2 VRaptors gives you good speed, but cost more than a SSD and still falls behind. I don't really see a point going with 2 VRaptors..
Yeah, I don't see the logic in that either... I'm waiting 'till Windows 7 to buy my first SSD, then I'll take out the 250GB that I'm using for video right now and use the 640GB for video and data alike (and the SSD for the OS and most programs). If I were buying right now I'd absolutely go with an SSD over two VRaptors or even a single one though.

Not sure what apps you're waiting on to be optimized for SSDs... It's nowhere near the same thing as adding additional cores, that's kind of the beauty of an SSD upgrade right now, it's a big improvement across the board, much more so than any other kind of upgrade. The only optimizations that SSDs need are towards improving their performance as they're used/filled and minimizing unnecessary writes that were usually done to speed up systems that operated w/regular HDDs, which ultimately has more to do with longevity and sustained performance over time than raw speed.

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
While SDDs are technically much faster, I don't see their benefit due to price in a home desktop computer. Servers I can see more, as well as laptops that are moved alot. But I think theres still 1 more year, until the price is good enough to go to the desktop. I opted for 2x VRaptors, and in normal use, *I* don't need more speed than that.

If you only do storage, or doing server style datebase, etc. Then I can see it.

I don't have SSD's though, that was just my decision, I opted for more space, and I think the VRaptors I got are good enough for me for now , once prices drop though, SDDs all the way.
Well, of course 2 VRaptors gives you good speed, but cost more than a SSD and still falls behind. I don't really see a point going with 2 VRaptors..

hmz

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmz
Well, of course 2 VRaptors gives you good speed, but cost more than a SSD and still falls behind. I don't really see a point going with 2 VRaptors..
Doesn't cost more than a SDD of same size. My OS and programs fall into 300 gigs total. I like having both os and programs in one raid, then everything else, everywhere else.

I got 2 VRaptors 300 gigs each. So that gives me enough space for everything and to expand. 600 Gigs of SSD would be a way higher cost.

When the prices fall that I can get 600 gigs of SSD for the same price I paid for my raptors, then its time to move on.

AFAIK my 2 Vraptors will beat or come close to a single SDD on the same price. IE Any SSD's under 400 bucks. And Ill have alot more space to boot.

I believe by the time SDDS hit high Gigabyte or Terabyte sizes and are cheap enough, and we have SATA 3, to take advantage of, then it will make a significant difference.

Unfornately I don't have SDDs to test, but I do have my raptors, and when my system is assembled, I would be more than welcomed to benchmark agaisnt SSD's, etc .

I am not defending the VR's, Ill go to whatever is the best option, but my opinion from what I seen and benchmarks I researched, SSD's have the speed down, not much else, and when price, and size catch up, then it will be time to put those suckers in here. I mean I do have 4 more 3.5 slots to fill


Plus, games, applications, etc will have to go to the lowest common denominator, not everyone will have SSD's and until they become common place, theres no way they will be really needed. They will shave time off rendering or things like that, but not much else. When apps can be optimized to take advantage of their full speed, then again I think its time to move on. People are barely Dual Core'd, its like a 50/50 split or so, its going to be a while imo.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

While SDDs are technically much faster, I don't see their benefit due to price in a home desktop computer. Servers I can see more, as well as laptops that are moved alot. But I think theres still 1 more year, until the price is good enough to go to the desktop. I opted for 2x VRaptors, and in normal use, *I* don't need more speed than that.

If you only do storage, or doing server style datebase, etc. Then I can see it.

I don't have SSD's though, that was just my decision, I opted for more space, and I think the VRaptors I got are good enough for me for now , once prices drop though, SDDs all the way.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmz
OCZ Vertex is already cheap. Dunno how much cheap you guys want. Even the VRaptor got cheaper..
People have gotten used to putting down a Ben and getting a terabyte drive. So when you gotta put down more than 2 to get "ONLY" 60 gigabytes, it can seem kinda pricey to most people.

Don't try and be logical and explain that 60 gig is plenty big enough for MOST peoples OS drive. Or that their performance will be vastly superior to the TB drive for the C note. Or that it is silent and uses less energy. The just get hung up on the price and the size.

Don

DonDon

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megalomaniac
Rumors:
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,9414.html

$2,000 - $3,000 for those Colossus.

not holding my breath, but nice to see them making these 3.5 drives. pretty the same as buying a 3.5 enclosure that can hold 2 SSDs.
Hexus confirms this price also.


I am quite excited, these prices should drop fast.

Ockie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

OCZ Vertex is already cheap. Dunno how much cheap you guys want. Even the VRaptor got cheaper..

hmz

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrobass24
Capacities will be available in 512gb and 1tb.....no info on pricing
Rumors:
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,9414.html

$2,000 - $3,000 for those Colossus.

not holding my breath, but nice to see them making these 3.5 drives. pretty the same as buying a 3.5 enclosure that can hold 2 SSDs.

Megalomaniac

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Wouldn't be surprised if those are the prices. But a 1TB drive could replace my 2 harddrives now. But for that price is not even worth it. Doubt many will sell. Just think you spend $2000 this year, then one year later your purchase is now worth $1000. I'd be willing to spend $1000 on 1 terabyte, but not 2000.

Galvin

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

New jmicron controller is due soon... 612 i think...

XS Janus

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Excerpt taken from OCZ press release

Quote:
With a line of SSDs leading the adoption of flash mass storage, OCZ is excited to reveal for the first time the OCZ “Colossus” one terabyte SSD prototype, in a new 3.5” form factor to be a truly viable flash-based solution for desktops without the need for converter brackets. OCZ continues to pave the way in the SSD sector and prove that these next generation drives are the ideal upgrade for cutting-edge computing, offering incredible storage capacities and fast data access for your home, office, or gaming station.
Capacities will be available in 512gb and 1tb.....no info on pricing

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrobass24
There is no question that the Intel is a superior drive.
The problem is that its twice the price for same amount of space, than that of the Vertex....and does not have the sequential write speeds even close to the Vertex.
Yea The X25-E does, but its $800 for 64gb

Even after degredation it will still be lightyears better than your avg 7200rpm HDD.
QFT

Exactly, SSDs are so much faster than standard hard drives that even with some performance loss due to overwriting, they are still much better.

As with any cutting edge technology, whatever you buy now will be cheaper and better in 6 months. There is no way around that. And in 6 months after that, something cheaper and faster will again be available. You simply must decide your budget, and see if you can get something that will work for you at the time, and don't agonize over it after you make your decision. Buying cutting edge tech is worse than buying a new car.

You can maximise your future options by leaning towards bigger drives if you can afford them. That is the only regret I have about buying 4 X 30 gig OCZ solids 5 months ago. I should have gone with 3 X 60 gigs instead. Not a big deal, just something to consider.

Don

DonDon

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

This is indeed the perfect time to buy. There are some card based SSD's coming out, but they will be found in the 1,500+ price range.

Ockie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrilix
All I know is that Intel is more than 3x as good as the OCZ on 4K random reads/writes, and also has better read speed, although inferior write speed. Also, Intel has released firmware (that has been tested) to address the performance degradation issue. The Vertex is as yet insufficiently tested, and in what testing I've seen, degrades much more. I would put my money with Intel (and I do).

Also, I'd say that if you're pretty well-off, then the time is now.
There is no question that the Intel is a superior drive.
The problem is that its twice the price for same amount of space, than that of the Vertex....and does not have the sequential write speeds even close to the Vertex.
Yea The X25-E does, but its $800 for 64gb

Even after degredation it will still be lightyears better than your avg 7200rpm HDD.

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

It's the perfect time to buy. IMHO anyone sporting an i7 and a gaming video card will appreciate a SSD enough to justify the purchase. We buy new processors and video cards and are fairly happy with a 10-20% performance increase. An SSD delivers much more than that over your standard SATA drives.

ochadd

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

I read that SSD price may be cut in half before the end of the year.
One thing is certain, there is still room for price cuts!

RadXge

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by echn111
Considering an SSD, but am wondering when would be the right time to buy. I generally prefer to buy shortly after new technology comes out and replaces old tech.

However, from what I've read, the two well regarded "safe" mid-range SSD purchases are the Intel X25-M and the OCZ Vertex. Of the two, the Intel is supposed to be perform slightly better. My concern is that in the SSD market, which is supposed to be moving very fast, the "best" well regarded semi-mainstream SSD drive is a positively ancient 9 months old now.

Prices have decreased now but I'm a bit concerned that the leader in the mid-range SSD is unchanged for so long. Is there something "significant" that is going to be released in the SSD market soon? When do you guys think is a decent time for a somewhat price concious purchaser to grab an SSD?
All I know is that Intel is more than 3x as good as the OCZ on 4K random reads/writes, and also has better read speed, although inferior write speed. Also, Intel has released firmware (that has been tested) to address the performance degradation issue. The Vertex is as yet insufficiently tested, and in what testing I've seen, degrades much more. I would put my money with Intel (and I do).

Also, I'd say that if you're pretty well-off, then the time is now.

Cyrilix

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

I just bought the 128 GB G. Skill Falcon. I cannot wait any longer and would miss out on the fun fast speed.

The way I think about is that "if you just put in a little overtime at work you will make some extra money for a pricier item." I always think about overtime work to justify my more extravagant spending.

EarthBrain

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

SSD's are in a constant and rapid state of evolution right now. That "out of date 9 months from now" situation isn't going to change much for the next year or so. SATA rev. 3.0 hardware is going to be released this year(amd SB850), with double the bandwidth (500-600 MB/s per drive) and a few other tweaks. From looking at products manufacturers have out now it's likely SSD's that can max out SATA rev. 3 will be out as soon as there are motherboards and controllers that can use them. There's also hardware TRIM support and windows 7. Other than the indilinx based drives (vertex, ultradrive ME, falcon) no one else has announced they will support it. The X25-m seems to have a good enough controller that it's not going to matter as much, and they can probably support trim via firmware when they think the time is right. Otherwise unless the drive supports or can be flashed to support trim I wouldn't even think of purchasing it.

Edit: I'd say if you have the money and don't want to upgrade your motherboard soon, grab a 120 or 80 gig SSD from ocz or intel. Use it for windows and your favorite apps and games. SATA3 speeds won't do any good if you only have a sata2 controller. There's some debate as to whether the increased bandwidth will matter as much as the lower latency inherent to SSD's, so you'll probably have most of the benefits even with a current drive.

Yoda4561

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by echn111
Hello, I'm not sure where this thread went, but I did end up buying an Intel X25-M. Everyone's feedback was useful, and I did end up reading a bit more about SSD's.

I fully agree that an SSD purchase does depend on situation. And the decision is not as clearcut from either the pro-SSD or pro-HDD perspective. SSD's are a relatively new consumer technology, many early adopters have been burnt (e.g. early jmicron related stuttering) and most pc users should stick to mature HDD technology.

Buying an SSD is still a risk - as a consumer technology, it is still not mature, and expensive. "But" I think the major limitations and risks are now understood and major companies are actively addressing them with firmware upgrades, O/S adjustments or new features, and price discounts. Some of the results are seen in the feedback on this board. No one is aware of any seriously exciting new breakthrough SSD products, so I see prices decreasing "gradually" rather than dramatically decreasing.

So the risks are a lot lower now, but still there - but it's my hard earned money to risk and my hobby. So thanks to the efforts of the "early adoptors" and feedback, I'm now far more confident I'm not buying either a significantly flawed technology, or a lemon of a product, when I go with the Intel X25-M today.
Good choice. When I set out to buy an SSD, I was thinking... Intel or OCZ, so one thing that I thought was how much I'd be paying. Buying 2 x 60 GB Vertexes was too expensive, and the 80 GB Intel would offer me just the amount of space I was looking for (for starters, anyway). I'm not disappointed with my purchase, and will be glad to add another one in later, when prices drop at least 50%.

Cyrilix

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Let us know how you've liked it after you've had the chance to play around with it!

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Good time to buy?

That's the original question of this thread, after it got derailed by pc1x1's attempt at justifying his WD Velocity Raptor hard drive purchases instead of going for Solid State Disk instead.

(Off topic but I need to say it: pc1x1, you made a poor decision and you're wasting your time in the futility that is trying to justify your purchase to others. Folks that are long time forum users have seen the same exact behavior from many others before and all the justifying and reasoning doesn't lead anywhere until the person realizes or has the truth smacked into this face that his decision was an unwise one. Stop it, you're wasting everyone's time, get over the past and think how you can fix things. At this point if you have a chance return the hard drives and get a good SSD instead or eBay the drives and hope to recoup your costs that you can put away towards a good SSD now Intel X25-M or OCZ Vertex possibly.)

Back to the question. I've been progressively upgrading the storage in my old computer for a while now, starting with WD Caviar 250GB 7.2K, to 320GB, 500GB, and now WD Caviar Green 1TB 5.4K. I've been using the same OS install since I believe Windows XP SP1 came out and been doing progressive updates every since. I've been had automatic defragmentation on my drives for a long time and I have enough space to be constantly at 0% fragmentation, but all the updates have shifted all the files all over the platters that I'm guessing most of the files for each application are peppered all around the drive. I'm hoping that Windows XP's PreFetch is doing it's job but frankly without NCQ support on my old nForce 4 chipset I'm a bit behind the curve.

Just recently I helped my friend build an Ultimate HTPC and I recommended that since he's building a whole new system that he should jump on the SSD bandwagon. He took my advice and bought the Intel X25-M SSD 80GB drive back when it cost $363 USD ($4.5375 per GB). I updated it for him to the new 8820 firmware to resolve the issue with the old version of those drives that would slow down as they fill up in capacity. He's been using it every since.

Just recently I got a little sick of my system being unresponsive every time I wanted to open up a new application while using another one, or even starting up a new command prompt, and having to wait 5-10 seconds to open up a simple TextPad editor. I finally looked at the drive and it dropped to $314 USD ($3.925 per GB). I've been reading all the relevant AnandTech Storage reviews and updates so the OCZ Vertex drives came into my view also. Looking at the OCZ Vertex 120GB for $375 USD ($3.125 per GB) it is a very good drive for the price.

However comparing the Intel X25-M and the OCZ Vertex I feel that the price of the latter is a little high for the low preformance if offers for random read and write speeds as compared to the Intel. The usage pattern for the operating system drive is mostly composed of random reads and writes so this is the most important metric of all when it comes to system responsiveness. The emphasis that people put on the super fast sequential read and write numbers is completely wrong for the vast majority of usage patterns for any hard drive, unless you spend your entire time writing and reading entire hard drives full of data such as uncompressed video or audio files.

I do have multiple WD Green 1 TB 5.4K hard drives full of media files and frankly on my gimped PCI SATA I controller I hit 44 MB/s sustained speed when I do a while drive copy or large media files copy, but I do that only once every few months so I don't care if it taxes 5x as long than it would with an SSD or not since I just queue up the copies with Total Commander and let them rip while I do other work.

Now the small difference in price $69 USD for the drive ($0.80 per GB) or 20% difference in price looks like it would favor the OCZ Vertex drive, but when you consider the random read and write performance of this drive you see that it is almost 958% slower than the Intel.



The random read results are very good from the Vertex drive, since it is only 30% slower than the Intel drive meaning that the Intel drive reads more data in that time.



But when you look at the latency you see that it is ~40% slower there also. That means that it is nearly half as responsive as the Intel drive. Close to being twice a slow.



Even with the newest firmware update for the OCZ Vertex drive it is still 350% slower in random writes than Intel.



If you consider the fact that the SSD will be used mostly for random read and writes during the OS boot and usage cycles then you will realize the importance of this metric. Then if you look at the fact that for a mere 20% price difference per gigabyte that you pay for the Intel drive over the OCZ Vertex you get 350% more performance in the one metric that counts you suddenly realize how much superior the Intel drive is right now. Where else can you get that kind of a performance boost for a product with such a small difference in price.

I know that looking at aggregate performance scores from SYSMark 2007 the difference between the OCZ Vertex and Intel X25-M get a lot closer to each other, but you have to consider that some of the parts of this benchmark such as the Video Production and 3D part heavily favors sequential read and write access where the OCZ Vertex drives is able to catch up to the Intel and skew the result towards its favor. Be aware though that aggregate and average statistics have a bad way of fuzzing the real statistics for individual parts because the hide all the peaks and valleys, the important ones that expose weakness in certain areas, such as the random read and write performance.

If I consider my intended usage for an SSD it will be primarily to hold the OS, Program, and Game files and most of the access there will be random as I start new applications or activate new features or load resource files. Very little will be sequential since I won't be using my SSD to store any sizeable media files, which will remain on my HDD drives that give me great price/performance ratio for sequential data access and large media file storage.

So in conclusion, I bit the bullet and finally joined the SSD crowd by buying the Intel X25-M 80GB MLC SSD drive for $314 USD (@ $3.925 per GB) because I feel that compared to my WD Caviar Blue 320GB 7.2K drive it will make a big difference in the responsiveness of my operating system, program loading, and game loading.

I am also aware that Intel is going to be releasing new products in the Q3/4 of 2009 in a few months but I'm unwilling to wait that long since the price of these new releases will of course be at a premium since they will be new to the market. I know that in 1-year the price of my 80GB drive will drop 50-70% but in that time I will be happy with being able to use my SSD for that whole year and get my money's ($300 isn't exactly a fortune) worth for vastly improved system responsivness and lower stress levels from having to wait for everything for so long as I do now.


So now is a good time as any to buy an SSD!

JakFrost

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Old benchmarks with old firmware there Jak, especially the first one. And why do you think random write speed is the most important metric? As long as random write speed isn't ridiculously low, like it was with the JMicron drives, then it doesn't make much of a difference. I would argue access time and read speed are much more important, unless of course the write speed is terrible (cough... JMicron).

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
Old benchmarks with old firmware there Jak, especially the first one. And why do you think random write speed is the most important metric? Actually, as long as random write speed isn't ridiculously slow, like it was with the JMicron drives, then it doesn't make much of a difference.
Last one isn't an old bench mark, new firmware.

JMicron controller drives, be serious? I'm glad that I held back from SSD's until the whole JMicron issue became exposed and I was able to limit my buying choices considerably thanks to the great reviews. Still going from HDD to even a bad JMicron controller SSD without partition alignment will still have a huge performance increase so folks will be happy with the results.

Also good thing that the Intel slowdown over time firmware issue was also exposed and resolved because of reviews.

The random read performance is probably more important for regular usage since the operating system spends more time reading data and loading files than than random writing files but both of these metrics combined is really what is important. I just want to emphasize that sequential metrics are bunk and shouldn't be used to make decisions.

I've waited, read, and then weight my choices and I came down on the Intel as the choice after a bit of a price drop.

Updated: One more thing the people waiting for larger capacity SSD drives for lower prices are waiting needlessly. I just recently had to increase my Windows XP partition size from 20 GB to 40 GB to install Visual Studio 2008. Including the OS 25GB and ~30GB of games that I have installed (mostly ones I don't play anymore), that 80 GB drive is roomy enough to suit my needs and growth for a while, until next year until SSD's double or triple in capacity for same price.

JakFrost

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost
Last one isn't an old bench mark, new firmware.
It's not the latest firmware though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost
I just want to emphasize that sequential metrics are bunk and shouldn't be used to make decisions.
I wouldn't go that far. While sequential reads/writes occur less often, they do occur.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
It's not the latest firmware though.
Yes, I know that there was a new release afterward but are you implying that the newest OCZ Vertex firmware somehow matched or surpassed Intel's random read/write performance?

Because it seems like you're implying that without being specific about what performance improvements it includes, except for fixing the corruption issue with the past firmware update.

Reference the numbers please.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost
I just want to emphasize that sequential metrics are bunk and shouldn't be used to make decisions.
I wouldn't go that far. While sequential reads/writes occur less often, they do occur.
Really, why not? Everyone seems obsessed about hundred megabyte a second sequential metrics when the fact is that both HDD and SDD do well in sequential access with the SSDs being a few times faster than HDDs. The real difference between these two technologies really shows with random access where SSDs are hundreds of times faster than HDDs. There is a huge difference in the orders of magnitude between these technologies when comparing their performance for sequential and random read/write performance or latency.

These different SSDs compete really in the random performance category since the vast majority of access destined for them will match that kind of an access profile, with a little bit of sequential thrown in. Since all of them do well in sequential anyway, then I say disguard that metric when making a choice and focus where the real differences are... random performance.

JakFrost

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost
Yes, I know that there was a new release afterward but are you implying that the newest OCZ Vertex firmware somehow matched or surpassed Intel's random read/write performance?

Because it seems like you're implying that without being specific about what performance improvements it includes, except for fixing the corruption issue with the past firmware update.

Reference the numbers please.
No, that's not what I was implying. I was just pointing out that those numbers may not still be accurate.

After browsing the OCZ forums, I found this iometer benchmark showing 4K random write speed with firmware 1370, so it seems there is some improvement with the new firmware.



I also noticed that firmware 1571 will be released shortly, so we'll see what that brings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost
Really, why not? Everyone seems obsessed about hundred megabyte a second sequential metrics when the fact is that both HDD and SDD do well in sequential access with the SSDs being a few times faster than HDDs. The real difference between these two technologies really shows with random access where SSDs are hundreds of times faster than HDDs. There is a huge difference in the orders of magnitude between these technologies when comparing their performance for sequential and random read/write performance or latency.

These different SSDs compete really in the random performance category since the vast majority of access destined for them will match that kind of an access profile, with a little bit of sequential thrown in. Since all of them do well in sequential anyway, then I say disguard that metric when making a choice and focus where the real differences are... random performance.
You can't base everything on 4 KB reads and writes, which are used to measure random performance. That's just the very end of the spectrum (the minimum block size), 2+ MB being the other end, which is used to measure sequential performance. What about 8K, 16K, 32K, etc? At some point, the Vertex passes the X25-M, and I believe that happens much closer to the 4 KB end than the 2 MB end.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

In your original post that I responded to, you were trying to figure out why someone would buy a Vertex over an X25-M. I'll tell you why...

Vertex 60GB - regularly $180 after rebate
Intel X25-M 80GB - $315

60GB is enough for a lot of people to install their OS and apps on, and they don't feel that the extra 20GB and slightly better performance are worth $135.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
In your original post that I responded to, you were trying to figure out why someone would buy a Vertex over an X25-M. I'll tell you why...

Vertex 60GB - regularly $180 after rebate
Intel X25-M 80GB - $315

60GB is enough for a lot of people to install their OS and apps on, and they don't feel that the extra 20GB and slightly better performance are worth $135.
Rebate Time!

That's true, I was not aware of the big rebate for the Vertex 60GB but the list price on Newegg.com for $229 -$30 = $199 at $3.316 per GB makes it seems expensive in cost per GB, being more expensive than the 120GB version. Even if you can get it for $180 at $3 per GB from another retailer then it is a pretty good price, and this is slightly less expensive than 120GB. (I'm reference Newegg.com since I usually shop there but lately I've noticed other vendors, such as ProVantage that offer lower prices on some things, like my HP LP2475w monitor for example.)

This OCZ Vertex 60GB drive with its price and performance does fit a certain budget for some people who don't want to spend $300+ for an SSD and who can do with 60GB with an attractive sub $200 price. I can definitely see folks who would go for 2x60GB in RAID0 for $360 to get better performance to boot than a single Intel.

OCZ Vertex Considered and Recommended

I myself did consider the OCZ Vertex 60GB as a preferred alternative to Intel, especially in that Ultimate HTPC that I built for my friend. The Intel being a second choice only because of the large price premium at the time for the Intel drive. In the end I showed my friend the two choices and he chose to pay more for the Intel drive a few months back when the price was $4.5 per GB for the Intel

I myself had to make the same decision this week and I briefly looked at the prices per GB of the Intel X25-M 80GB and OCZ Vertex 120GB and decided that the small additional premium of 20% was worth the larger 40/350% increase in performance for random read/write performance.

Oversight In A Hurry

I have to honestly admit that I did not really consider going with the 60GB or 2 x 60GB because I was so focused on the 80 vs 120 numbers. I could have gone with 2 x 60GB for RAID-0 but it just didn't occur to me at the time since I was so thrilled to be able to afford $300 for an SSD upgrade that I just jumped at the Intel first, salivating at the mouth.

Was it the best choice to make verus the OCZ Vertex 60GB? I honestly don't know but buying the Intel certainly does not feel like a wrong choice because I'm going with the top performance leader that is only now slightly overpriced by 20%, and not 40-50% as just a few months ago.

Would I have gotten more performance from 2 x 60 GB for $360 instead of 1 x 80 GB for $314? That is quite possible but a few benchmarks probably would still not catch up, such as random write performance since that's like 350% out. Even with the newest firmware of 10 MB/s versus Intels 23.1 MB/s the difference is still 230% percent, closer with 2x 60 GB but still not there.

RAID-0 Striping - With A Punch In The Face

However, even as folks exalt RAID-0 setups like the greatest thing in the world, I'm running a 3.5-year old nForce4 chipset on a flaky DFI motherboard and I have routinely seen my RAID-1 setups get split into two separate arrays for no reason at all. For months everything is fine, one day the systems boots with an error and the array is split and doubled but the hard drives are perfectly fine with no errors and identical data. If this happened with my RAID-0 stripe set, say goodbye to my OS and hello reinstall/reimage from backup. I've been able to fix my RAID-1 mirror set problems by having to recreate the array and completely resync the drive for ~5-hours. How much time would it take me to do a completely reinstall or reimage from backup and restore data files if my RAID-0 went belly up one random day?

For me at this time with a limited budget it seems more prudent and safer to go with 1 x 80 GB and hope that by the time I move to the new Intel Core i7 or i5 if it's out by the time I have extra money to upgrade my system and ditch this DFI Expert Motherboard with shitty Silicon Image controller and all the other baggage and problems of AMD Opteron system.

OCZ The Underdog

Just because I chose Intel for myself I don't consider myself a fanboy needing to push the Intel X25-M brand on to people or look down upon OCZ Vertex drives. I think that the many recent convictions against Intel show that they are a corporation with no scruples that abuses its monopoly powers to step on the little guys at every turn and do tricks to keep them from gaining a foothold in the market. They did that with AMD for processors and they will do that with OCZ for SSDs.

I am all for OCZ as the underdog rolling out attractive products to punch Intel in the face and put them in their place. I don't like the prices that Intel puts on their products because if it wasn't for the little competitors to this monstrous giant Intel would raise the prices for all peripherals to unheard of levels to suck everyone dry.

I just hope that OCZ with work more with Indillix to improve their SSD products and controllers to hopefully take the crown away from Intel forcing some real competition in the market. I as the consumer want to see them fight it out and offer us better products in exchange. OCZ is still sticking its fingers in the pudding trying to figure out all the little engineering problems seeing how they are releasing a new firmware every month or so. Frankly, right now I'm not interested in their recipe since I don't want to take a taste only to spit it out and reformat my drive with every new firmware. I'm patient enough to let them work on it until they get it right with new products.

As things stand now Intel has a champion product but OCZ is biting at its heels with the Vertex line. Vertex 2 is just around the corner and the real fight is about to begin. The SSDs that we have seen now are really only the beginning and now the market is starting to take shape with the players getting into their places.

However, I'm not interested in continuing to wait for the next round of fights because the fight will last a long time before things settle down to a controlled little brawl. I waited long enough since last year and I just bought my first SSD now, but later I'll need another one with more capacity so that's where I'll be looking for my next replacement.

Let them fight!!!

JakFrost

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Supposedly since firmware 1275 or 1.1 they managed to nix that whole "flashing the drive erases all data" thing. While there's still a risk, apparently the Vertexes can now be flashed without the need for a jumper and without loosing your data.

Yoda4561

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

My advice would be to at least opt for an SLC drive if you're going for an SSD. Flash media is degrading rapidly in quality, with data retention rates (was 10 year, now >1 year) and write cycles (was 100k, now >3k) for new Flash chips dropping all across the board. SLC chips are the only ones with <10k cycles and data retention of <1 year at this point.

True, you're unlikely to hit the write cycle limit with 'average' usage, but why risk it by going cheap on an SSD?

Elledan

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elledan
My advice would be to at least opt for an SLC drive if you're going for an SSD. Flash media is degrading rapidly in quality, with data retention rates (was 10 year, now >1 year) and write cycles (was 100k, now >3k) for new Flash chips dropping all across the board. SLC chips are the only ones with <10k cycles and data retention of <1 year at this point.

True, you're unlikely to hit the write cycle limit with 'average' usage, but why risk it by going cheap on an SSD?
This information is the opposite of what I read myself with engineers going crazy trying to kill cells to test longevity, only finding that it takes a huge amount of write cycles to make that happen.

There is of course a difference between bargain binned SSD's from some minor manufacturers like Transcend, Supertallent, RIDATA and the major SSDs from others like Intel, OCZ (Vertex, Summitt), Samsung.

Do you have any references to what you are saying here because I'm having trouble verifying your facts about longetivity?

I found this yesterday but I had a much better reference to what I was saying, but I can't find it right now.

Ask an Intel Solid State Drive Engineer

Quote:
Q. How can I be sure my SSD will be reliable?

A. There are multiple issues here and I'll try to touch on each. First of all, flash memory is a well established technology, so long term studies have been done and the results are fairly well known. Flash cells do have a limited number of read/write cycles and this is one of the major reasons that SSDs haven't been popular until recently. Fortunately, the industry has progressed to a point where the limits are far away enough that engineers can make a useful product out of it. The Intel SSD datasheet claims 5 years minimum useful life and what they mean is regardless of your usage, your drive will function for the full duration. You might get far more than 5 years if you aren’t quite so rough with it.

The Intel SSDs implement the ATA SMART monitoring feature set, and it is probably your best source of information for signs of failure. I don’t work in failure analysis so I don’t have the details, but you can be sure that the protection of user data is top priority.

JakFrost

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost
Do you have any references to what you are saying here because I'm having trouble verifying your facts about longetivity?
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1425800

That's the thread I posted a few days ago, linking to a series of articles at Tech-On (Japanese tech site) on recent developments with SSDs and their future.

Elledan

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

I'll take my information from an Intel SSD engineer over an uncited, unsourced article in some random japanese tech journal, thanks.

mwarps

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwarps
I'll take my information from an Intel SSD engineer over an uncited, unsourced article in some random japanese tech journal, thanks.
Tech-On is published by Nikkei Business Publications and has an online and magazine presence. NBP is one of the biggest publishers in Japan. They're hardly some 'random' Japanese organization. Please do some research before you make yourself look foolish.

Elledan

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elledan
Tech-On is published by Nikkei Business Publications and has an online and magazine presence. NBP is one of the biggest publishers in Japan. They're hardly some 'random' Japanese organization. Please do some research before you make yourself look foolish.
If they're anything like Maximum PC then I wouldn't trust them. Just sayin'.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elledan
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1425800

That's the thread I posted a few days ago, linking to a series of articles at Tech-On (Japanese tech site) on recent developments with SSDs and their future.
I re-quoted the relevant sections about reliability in the articles.

Quote:
TechOn - SSDs Challenge HDDs, but Quality a Problem [Part 1]

Cost vs Reliability
SSD prices may continue to drop in the future, and thanks to high-density packaging and other technologies from the semiconductor industry, will continue to shrink in size, thickness, etc. The future indeed seems rosy for equipment manufacturers.

There is, however, a problem that still has to be overcome before SSDs can achieve that future growth. Evolution toward lower cost will be made possible by finer manufacturing technology, multi-level architecture and other advances, but these changes will also degrade NAND Flash memory quality.

NAND Flash memory quality is also beginning to drop. Chips manufactured using 90nm-generation technology in 2004-05, for example, were assured for about 100,000 rewrites and data retention of about a decade. As multi-level architecture and smaller geometry are introduced, quality is showing a sharp decline. The 30nm 2-bit/cell chips expected to enter volume production in 2009-10 may well end up with a rewrite assurance of no more than 3,000 cycles, and a data retention time of about a year. The first 3-bit/cell chips are hitting the market now, with only a few hundred rewrites.

Different Characteristics

The assured number of rewrites, data retention time and other characteristics are the values of the NAND Flash memory (Fig 9). The life of the SSD is not entirely determined by these numbers, because of extensions made possible by the controller IC to keep the number of rewrites per memory cell equal (wear leveling), by error correction coding (ECC) and other measures.

These measures help, but they don't solve the problem. In addition to controller IC algorithms, tweaking the operating system (OS) and other items, etc, the life of the SSD will vary greatly with just how it is utilized by the equipment manufacturer, and the operating environment, including temperature, altitude and vibration frequency (Fig 10).

The biggest difference between SSDs and HDDs, as a source at a major manufacturer of SSD controller IC explains, is that "The number of rewrites, data retention time and other characteristics are limited. SSDs cannot be used in the same way as HDDs, which have always been considered as effectively unlimited." It would be best, it seems, not to think of them merely as HDDs without any moving parts.
Okay, this article talks about the the declining number of rewrites as manufacturers look towards smaller fab processes to make chips and also towards doing multi-bit cells, 2-bit, 3-bit, etc. It seems perfectly understandable that making the chips smaller and then trying to pack more bits per cell is going to lead towards finer signals and more problems in bit retention and higher difficulty in distinguishing bit values. I can see how they talk about 100,000 rewrite cycles for 90nm chips with 1-bit cells, and then go 3,000 for 30nm 3-bit cells and even less for smaller chips and higher capacities per cell.

I think that this article tries to spread a little F. U. D. to get a bit of a shock value with posting this information about declining reliability of SSDs while selectively ignoring the differences between the products that various SSD manufacturers make. They only make a little reference to data shuffling that the current SSDs do to prevent certain the cells from being over utilized and spreading the writes around evenly.

Not all SSDs are created equal and this is what is expected so it always goes back "caveat emptor" (buyer beware).

However, my original advice still stands and that is to buy your SSD from a reputable manufacturer. I feel confident that buying from Intel or Samsung are pretty safe bets. OCZ is becoming a leader in the field but I'm more concerned about their product lines since they did sell JMicron controller based SSD before they moved to the new Indillix. But would you really buy an SSD from an unknown company like SuperTalent, RiDATA, Transcend, or another generic rebrander offering massive capacities for dirt cheap prices and then put your operating system with all your documents on one of these drives? I sure wouldn't.

I trust my data to an SSD from a major manufacturer more since I know that they have their reputation on the line and at least the bigger manufacturers do their own testing to determine longetivity and reliability before they sell such products on the US market. Litigation is expensive, but more expensive is the loss of reputation if your new SSD suddenly dies and loses all the data and suddenly everyone is blaming your product for losing data and your brand name is tarnished forever.

I'm confident that the current generation of good quality drives is up to par in being able to handle server and desktop workload for years of service. I only need about 1-3 years of time for this drive to work since by that time the SSD market will be drastically changed and my little 80GB will be forgotten as the floppy disk is now. I'm sure that Intel over engineered the drive and speced to do a lot more than I will be using it for. I'll be running a SMART hard drive monitor utility to monitor the drive and inform me of any changes in the health status also just to make sure that things aren't degrading too quickly for me.

I bought an Intel drive because I'm not fully certain about OCZ Vertex line as the answer. OCZ is releasing a lot of firmware versions meaning that they are still stirring the pot and aren't finished cooking the product. Hopefully, they'll improve their product line in the near future and give Intel a run for the money to lower their damn high prices. I want to see competition.

JakFrost

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by JakFrost

So now is a good time as any to buy an SSD!

For use in a desktop, what do you think would be a better purchase:

(2) X25-M 80GB in RAID 0 on ICH10R

or

(1) X25-M 160GB

Or, what is a better X25-M purchase right now for any use: 2 X 80GB or 1 X 160GB?

aamsel

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by aamsel
For use in a desktop, what do you think would be a better purchase:

(2) X25-M 80GB in RAID 0 on ICH10R

or

(1) X25-M 160GB

Or, what is a better X25-M purchase right now for any use: 2 X 80GB or 1 X 160GB?
2x80gb as you'll have faster reads/writes. The ICH10R is pretty good up to 750~ read/writes.

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrilix
All I know is that Intel is more than 3x as good as the OCZ on 4K random reads/writes, and also has better read speed, although inferior write speed. Also, Intel has released firmware (that has been tested) to address the performance degradation issue. The Vertex is as yet insufficiently tested, and in what testing I've seen, degrades much more. I would put my money with Intel (and I do).

Also, I'd say that if you're pretty well-off, then the time is now.
The Intel drive has better random reads/writes, but the Vertex has better sequential reads/writes. Also, the Vertex now supports trim so it's performance probably degrades even less than the Intel drive.


gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Also, keep in mind that JMicron is releasing a new controller very soon. Drives using this controller should be on the market within the next couple months, so you might want to wait until someone reviews one of these new drives.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
snip

And until I see someone here posting hard facts, and benches that disagree with reviews I am not really convinced.

snip
STOP! Hammer time. 300GB VelociRaptor vs. Vertex

Price/GB
VRaptor - $0.67
Vertex - $2.95

Access Time
VRaptor - 6.8 ms
Vertex - 0.1 ms

Random Read
VRaptor - 0.55 MB/s
Vertex - 34.9 MB/s

Random Write
VRaptor - 1.63 MB/s
Vertex - 6.47 MB/s

Sequential Read
VRaptor - 118.0 MB/s
Vertex - 255.9 MB/s

Sequential Write
VRaptor - 118.9 MB/s
Vertex - 135.3 MB/s


Vertex 5 (4 by incredibly large margins), VRaptor 1 (price)

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
STOP! Hammer time. 300GB VelociRaptor vs. Vertex

Price/GB
VRaptor - $0.67
Vertex - $2.95

Access Time
VRaptor - 6.8 ms
Vertex - 0.1 ms

Random Read
VRaptor - 0.55 MB/s
Vertex - 34.9 MB/s

Random Write
VRaptor - 1.63 MB/s
Vertex - 6.47 MB/s

Sequential Read
VRaptor - 118.0 MB/s
Vertex - 255.9 MB/s

Sequential Write
VRaptor - 118.9 MB/s
Vertex - 135.3 MB/s


Vertex 5 (4 by incredibly large margins), VRaptor 1 (price)
1. Source?
2. Go vs 2x VR's in Raid 0 not one vs 1, its the vertex is way more expensive.
3. Price/Size/Performance kills it already.

I never said SSDs aren't better, they just aren't a better option right now, especially when they will for sure go down tremendously in cost, up their size in the near future, 6 months - 1 year. Of course its better tech, but your still not convincing me that right now its a better time to buy.

Also rarely do any applications need those speeds atm, the VR speeds are plenty fast, unless its a server etc. But w/e I gave my 2 cents. Some of you didn't read what I wrote, no point in repeating.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Or then if you got the money, you could soon get the Fusion-IO's ioXtreme. Rumored to cost 895$.

R0N1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
STOP! Hammer time. 300GB VelociRaptor vs. Vertex

Price/GB
VRaptor - $0.67
Vertex - $2.95

Access Time
VRaptor - 6.8 ms
Vertex - 0.1 ms

Random Read
VRaptor - 0.55 MB/s
Vertex - 34.9 MB/s

Random Write
VRaptor - 1.63 MB/s
Vertex - 6.47 MB/s

Sequential Read
VRaptor - 118.0 MB/s
Vertex - 255.9 MB/s

Sequential Write
VRaptor - 118.9 MB/s
Vertex - 135.3 MB/s


Vertex 5 (4 by incredibly large margins), VRaptor 1 (price)
With firmware 1.30 for the Vertex, seq write for me is up to 190mb/s.

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Come this fall SSD's will be getting another shakeup, with JMicron hopefully shipping the arm 612, and new players in the nand market.

DarkStryke

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
1. Source?
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3535

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
2. Go vs 2x VR's in Raid 0 not one vs 1, its the vertex is way more expensive.
Hahaha, even 2 VR's in Raid 0 don't stand a chance against a single Vertex!

Let's see... Raid doesn't help access time, so the Raptors will remain roughly 70 times slower. God, do I even have to continue? The damn Vertex is over 60 times faster at random reads, 4 times faster at random writes, over twice as fast at sequential reads, and according to aznx the sequential writes are now approaching twice the speed of a VR. How much extra performance do you think another VR in Raid will give you? I can tell you... not enough to catch up to even a single Vertex. And yes, as I stated, we know the Vertex is more expensive. That's the ONLY thing the VR's have going for them at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
3. Price/Size/Performance kills it already.
Well, price might kill it in your opinion. Size? Most new SSDs are available in 256GB capacities, which is nearly the same as the largest VR's. Performance? We've been over this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
Also rarely do any applications need those speeds atm, the VR speeds are plenty fast, unless its a server etc.
You've obviously never used a computer with a fast SSD like the Vertex or X25-M. It's the most noticeable performance boost I've ever seen from a single piece of hardware.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

I will willingly trade anyone 2 VR's for 120gb Vertex

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Make that an X-25M.

mutantmagnet

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3535



Hahaha, even 2 VR's in Raid 0 don't stand a chance against a single Vertex!

Let's see... Raid doesn't help access time, so the Raptors will remain roughly 70 times slower. God, do I even have to continue? The damn Vertex is over 60 times faster at random reads, 4 times faster at random writes, over twice as fast at sequential reads, and according to aznx the sequential writes are now approaching twice the speed of a VR. How much extra performance do you think another VR in Raid will give you? I can tell you... not enough to catch up to even a single Vertex. And yes, as I stated, we know the Vertex is more expensive. That's the ONLY thing the VR's have going for them at this point.



Well, price might kill it in your opinion. Size? Most new SSDs are available in 256GB capacities, which is nearly the same as the largest VR's. Performance? We've been over this...



You've obviously never used a computer with a fast SSD like the Vertex or X25-M. It's the most noticeable performance boost I've ever seen from a single piece of hardware.
Nope havent used a SSD so I don't doubt what your saying in that regard, again your missing the point, I know SDD is better overall, I think OP should merely wait until the prices fall and capacities increase. I explained already why I needed the space, and Don understood it the best. Where do you get the idea, I am saying SSD's aren't better. What I am saying is wait a while until prices drop, so you get performance and price to match, in their current capacities/price IMO, HDD > SSDs, and VR's should be fast enough in REAL world use to match those SSDs in most apps. All your configurations depend on the SSD as OS drive and then with some other drive to be DATA. In my case, when I do switch to 2-4 SSDs in Raid 0, then Ill make my VR's Data drives. Ill have the best of both worlds.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
Nope havent used a SSD so I don't doubt what your saying in that regard, again your missing the point, I know SDD is better overall, I think OP should merely wait until the prices fall and capacities increase. I explained already why I needed the space, and Don understood it the best. Where do you get the idea, I am saying SSD's aren't better. What I am saying is wait a while until prices drop, so you get performance and price to match, in their current capacities/price IMO, HDD > SSDs, and VR's should be fast enough in REAL world use to match those SSDs in most apps. All your configurations depend on the SSD as OS drive and then with some other drive to be DATA. In my case, when I do switch to 2-4 SSDs in Raid 0, then Ill make my VR's Data drives. Ill have the best of both worlds.
That's a negative on 1 VR = 1 Intel/Vertex SSD in REAL world use. You'd probably need 50 to even make a dent. 50 VRs is a lot more expensive than 1 Intel/Vertex for your price/performance ratio.

Also VRs are pretty slow on the price/capacity/performance ratio as newer 1TB/2TB drives are just as fast in seq read/write speeds.

300gb/$200 per VR

120gb/$350 per Vertex or 80gb/$320 per Intel isn't bad at all.

You mention having all that space 2 two VRs, but how much of the 600gb is REAL world use as you say? Stuff that you would use and access everyday..

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
*snip* Where do you get the idea, I am saying SSD's aren't better. *snip*
Guess I misunderstood what you were saying.

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

There'll never be an end to the GB/$/personal-acceptance-factor discussion.

Makes the whole thing much more interesting.

Old Hippie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
Guess I misunderstood what you were saying.
pc1x1 tries to imply that his 1 or 2 VRs = 1 Vertex/Intel in the real world...which is basically saying SSDs aren't better even for home desktop use, which is false..

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
Nope havent used a SSD so I don't doubt what your saying in that regard, again your missing the point, I know SDD is better overall, I think OP should merely wait until the prices fall and capacities increase. I explained already why I needed the space, and Don understood it the best. Where do you get the idea, I am saying SSD's aren't better. What I am saying is wait a while until prices drop, so you get performance and price to match, in their current capacities/price IMO, HDD > SSDs, and VR's should be fast enough in REAL world use to match those SSDs in most apps. All your configurations depend on the SSD as OS drive and then with some other drive to be DATA. In my case, when I do switch to 2-4 SSDs in Raid 0, then Ill make my VR's Data drives. Ill have the best of both worlds.
Raptors are nowhere near performance of a SSD in real world access use. Having an app pop up in 6-7 seconds versus a 1 second SSD is not "better", having that much heat and power pumping in a case is not "better".

SSD's are in the infancy period that generally doesn't reward early adopters, but they are the largest performance upgrade in day to day use you can do to a computer right now.

DarkStryke

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
Guess I misunderstood what you were saying.
Good now we are in the same page .

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkStryke
Raptors are nowhere near performance of a SSD in real world access use. Having an app pop up in 6-7 seconds versus a 1 second SSD is not "better", having that much heat and power pumping in a case is not "better".

SSD's are in the infancy period that generally doesn't reward early adopters, but they are the largest performance upgrade in day to day use you can do to a computer right now.
Your last sentence is exactly my point. THEY WIll GET BETTER, thats what OP is asking, damn. He wants to know, do I buy an SSD now or not.

I said, Get VR's for now if you need performance, or get a normal HDD, wait 6 months then get a SSD, not that hard to understand now is it?

And what aps take 6-7 seconds to open, I presume you have a slow computer. Because on mine, even heavy 2D or 3D, is very very fast. Seldom especially for a normal user is read and write a bottleneck, unless your doing video editing or something constantly. If you aren't using gigs of stuff, then in REAL world, it wont matter as much.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
Your last sentence is exactly my point. THEY WIll GET BETTER, thats what OP is asking, damn. He wants to know, do I buy an SSD now or not.

I said, Get VR's for now if you need performance, or get a normal HDD, wait 6 months then get a SSD, not that hard to understand now is it?

And what aps take 6-7 seconds to open, I presume you have a slow computer. Because on mine, even heavy 2D or 3D, is very very fast. Seldom especially for a normal user is read and write a bottleneck, unless your doing video editing or something constantly. If you aren't using gigs of stuff, then in REAL world, it wont matter as much.
That makes absolutely NO sense.

Yes they will get better, and so will HDD, and processors, and TV's.
Things are in a constant state of change.


BUT there is NO reason to wait for better SSD's for a desktop computer.
Yes they are going to get faster, but as you pointed out that most people never hit their peak read/write speeds unless they are working with large files.
So for "Real-World" use there is no reason to wait from a technological standpoint.

The only reason to wait is for the $/GB to come down.
But by the time you buy two VR's and in 6mo buy some SSD's you could have paid the same and just gotten SSD's in first place.

Then theres the argument that well its not enough space for all my music, and files, etc.
Well just get a 640gb for $60 to store all your crap and put your OS/apps on the SSD.
The OS and apps is where your gonna see the performance boost, not on your music its not like it will play any faster.

Also on what apps take longer than 6 secs to open......i dunno.....any Office program. Outlook will take 30secs to load on a HDD, but it opens instantly on my SSD.

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

double post

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

I am done with trying to explain it to you. Of course everything will get better, but all reports point to costs decreasing on SSD's etc.

Also even waiting 30 seconds for outlook, thats not really a big deal. You aren't going to die because you waited a few seconds. Thats what I am talking about in real world. Most benefits will be seconds, and if that.

Are SSDs better, yes, they are, but OP would be better served IMO if he waited, for price, and capacity to increase.

Meanwhile to answer his own question, he should get a normal HDD, wait those 30 seconds, and then in 6 months to a year get much better SSD's.

Tech will always get better, but sometimes theres outstanding products that are so good they last longer. ala 9800 pro, 8800 GTX, etc. I am not going to argue on what could be or what will be, I maybe right or you may be. But theres plently of precedents, Tech comes in way to expensive, then drastically goes down.

SSDs are bound to drastically go down. Again I never said the performance isn't there, it is, and it actually isn't needed, seconds aren't going to kill anyone! But once price is right, then getting back those seconds makes sense for nornal computing. If you work with Gigantic files, then by all means get it. Thats my whole argument, I never once said SSDs are faster, better etc. Hell I hope they are, the benefits they bring will finally help what has been the slowest part in the computer for ages, but for these current capacities, and price, theres no point. I highly doubt any of us, myself included actually NEED this speed. We certainly want it, but we don't need it per say. And before you go on a tanget I am not saying we don't need to progress, all I am saying is for the current market and price, OP is better served getting proven, mature and most importantly cheaper tech, ala HDD's, and then when prices hit mainstream, upgrade.

You could even use the HDDs op buys today, as his data drive in the future, should he need the space, when he upgrades to SSD.

I am done repeating myself, thanks!

And just as a precaution, if OP doesn't use alot of space, then he can get SSDs if he chooses, like I mentioned I have 300 gigs just on programs, and OS, no data, so I need the space, and I like OS and programs on the same drive, so VR's make sense for me. However since just 2 weeks ago, I was in the same position as OP, SSDs or VR's. It seems more sensible to go for VR's but I am honestly tired of trying to defend an opinion, its ridicolous, that you keep fragmenting my quotes, and worse yet trying state MY opinion is wrong, its hilarious.

Copy and paste Ockie's sig after 2 cents, .... yeah exactly.

I mean comon gtg465x after putting together my quotes understood what I meant on my posts. See if you can do the same. Sighs....

Ok I am done now

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

My problem is with sustained write speeds etc, also every single review on SSD vs VR's, on almost every single site points to VR as a better choice. I have no problem on agreeing to disagree and maybe I made the wrong choice, but I still don't see SSD's as a good value. Even the VR's value is hard to swallow since normal 7k HDD are much faster. I just saw to much love for SSDs, and wanted to point out to the OP that IMO not as good of a choice. But he can decide, but check many many reviews on the VR's and SSD, Almost every time the VR's win.

SSD's will be for sure the best choice eventually. I just don't think they are at the moment. And until I see someone here posting hard facts, and benches that disagree with reviews I am not really convinced.

Go look up reviews on the VR 300 gig, and it wins almost across the board with every site, for a myriad of reasons. Again I am not talking about theoretical, or 1 month or 6 months from now. I am talking about today, right now.

Feel free to post links to benchmarks where 1 or 2 $400 (in total cost) SDDs crush raptors, and better yet, a SSD with good capacity that crushes them, ie 120 or larger.

To the poster above, you just mentioned your buying your first SDD in October, which pretty much validates what I said, which is ironically hypocritical if you don't see the point of getting a VR now. Right now, is not the best time to get an SDD. If come October the prices (rumored to drop 50-80%), or optimizations get better, than I may agree with you. Until then, VR's still is the best choice for today. 4 months is a long time, and Windows 7 may bring the optimizations that I need.

From what I read and hear, in the next 6 months to 1 year it will be a good time to get an SSD, as the 512 gig ones, will be under $500. But that's a different case, for now, no thanks. If you have hard facts to prove otherwise feel free to share. My point is simple, TODAY June 4th, 2009, HDD's are more mature, and have better cost benefits than SSD's. For sure, if you like early adopting thats your thing, but no way, especially in $/Gigabytes are SSDs worth it for normal means.

I will look into getting 2 SSD's to raid 0 come windows 7 myself as well, most likely towards Dec, or Jan though. Than I can make the VR's into very fast data drives .

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

The reason the sites dont reccomend ssd's over VR's is two-fold.
1) Space
2) Price

If those dont matter then SSD is the better choice.

I have both, and will never use a HDD for a boot/system drive ever agian.

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Great thread. Thanks for all the veiwpoints, and thanks to the OP for stirring all this up.

coo-coo-clocker

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrobass24
The reason the sites dont reccomend ssd's over VR's is two-fold.
1) Space
2) Price

If those dont matter then SSD is the better choice.

I have both, and will never use a HDD for a boot/system drive ever agian.
Space no longer is an issue, it's just cost. You can get 1tb ssd's now in 2.5" of space... it's just cost now.

Ockie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrobass24
The reason the sites dont reccomend ssd's over VR's is two-fold.
1) Space
2) Price

If those dont matter then SSD is the better choice.

I have both, and will never use a HDD for a boot/system drive ever agian.
QFT

PC1X1 Said:
Quote:
My OS and programs fall into 300 gigs total. I like having both os and programs in one raid, then everything else, everywhere else.
Yes, if you feel that you need that much stuff on your fastest drive, then Vraptors are a better choice for you right now. But most apps do not really benefit from being on your fastest drive, so a hybrid approach would be a good choice for a lot of people. A 60 gig Vertex or 2 matched up to a WD 640 for bulk storage, for instance.

If you want to try and match hard drives and SSDs for space and price only, then HDs will seem like a good investment for a long time to come. But once you throw speed, particularly access time into the mix, then the choice becomes a lot closer.

Like nitrobass, after using SSDs for my OS drives, I will NEVER willingly go back to using a magnetic drives again. But I will continue to use magnetic drives for buk storage for the forseable future. I know, I need to update my sig.

Don

DonDon

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Like nitrobass, after using SSDs for my OS drives, I will NEVER willingly go back to using a magnetic drives again.
I've said about the same thing when I went to the origional Raptor, then a VR, and now SSDs.

What's next in line?

Old Hippie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Memristors or isolinear optical chips or something

Yoda4561

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoda4561
Memristors or isolinear optical chips or something
Sign me up for those .

Its a good convo that we are having here, and with the last 3 posts I totally agree. Notice that when I posted, I used alot of *I*, me and IMO, because to me the VR's were the better choice. And to others in a similar situation, the VR's problably benefit more now. I guess I was just , on those posts that spoke as if I were or something hehe. As if there was no reason why one would buy a VR etc.

But I agree 100% that if your only loading up your OS and don't use alot of space, the SSD's are a good choice. The only thing and goes with what Ockie said, size isn't to much of an issue the 512 gig ones exist already. Its cost.

I am upgrading as we speak, so the two choices were, 2x SSD's or the VR's. I figured go with the VR's for now, and later on get 2x 256 or higher SSD's. Then my data drives would also be fast, ala the VR's its a win win.

I think OP will be better served to buy VR's or something similar for more space for now, and in the future in 6 months or now then get SSD's. At least thats my personal plan, can't wait for the WD's SSD T-Rex (Name Patent pending) (/joke)

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Yep, as long as you're satisfied with the performance of what you have now, there's no harm in waiting for SSD prices to inevitably drop. When my best friend was specc'ing out his first gaming PC build last month (he was a mac guy) I recommended against getting into SSD's for now. He's not exactly a techhead so for reliable "don't need to mess with it" performance normal hard drives are better for the time being. Best to ease him into PC's with more mature hardware. Next year I think will be a completely different story.

Yoda4561

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Apprently SuperTalent is working on a pcie based SSD that will use 8 of the indilix controllers, and provide Read/Writes 1.5/1.3gbs 1tb is supposed to come in under $1000, but I dont think we will see that for another 6months

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

As a charter member of the "cheap bastards club" (our motto: we are too cheap to use capital letters), I think that SSDs don't provide the right amount of performance for the price. They will have to get much cheaper before I buy any. Do I want some SSDs? Of course. But not at these prices.




Pocatello

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocatello
As a charter member of the "cheap bastards club" (our motto: we are too cheap to use capital letters), I think that SSDs don't provide the right amount of performance for the price. They will have to get much cheaper before I buy any. Do I want some SSDs? Of course. But not at these prices.
As a charter member of the "C.B.C." you should know that statement would be considered heresy in any thread containing the letters "SSD" and you put yourself in the position of being condemned forever to mechanical HD purgartory.......I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere.

Old Hippie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by ochadd
It's the perfect time to buy.
It's not the perfect time to buy. For consumer class products (enterprises is a very different matter) it's the best time to start considering SSDs because we are now more aware of the flaws and what we should avoid.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrilix
All I know is that Intel is more than 3x as good as the OCZ on 4K random reads/writes, and also has better read speed, although inferior write speed. Also, Intel has released firmware (that has been tested) to address the performance degradation issue. The Vertex is as yet insufficiently tested, and in what testing I've seen, degrades much more. I would put my money with Intel (and I do).

Also, I'd say that if you're pretty well-off, then the time is now.
Parts of this assessment are badly worded. When this person is talking about write speeds being better on the vertex he is talking about sequential speeds.

That's why he correctly points out Intel having better random writing speeds.

Furthermore OCZ does their own firmware updates and from customer reactions they have been good and in some cases excellent.

Intel is the best but the most expensive and uses a different GB structure that can make or break your buying thresholds.

Samsung's degradtion is less severe than Intel and the recovery from degradation is superior. But Samsung doesn't quite match the performance of Intel or OCZ in certain areas depending on block size of data.

OCZ should be considered the baseline for an SSD worth buyng. Anything else below them is complete garbage. The Vertex has a slightly lesser price advantage over Samsung while offering better performance in some areas at the start but OCZ's recovery after being used is inferior to even INtel's and can lead to it being less capable than the Samsung product over time.

It should be stated that the key fact that makes each of these SSDs viable are their controllers so don't get too attached to the brand name. Samsung and Intel make their own controllers and their controllers can be found in other products such as Kingston and Corsair.

OCZ doesn't make their own controller but instead get's it from a company called Indilix.Indilix controllers can now be found in another brand's SSD but I can't remember the name,

mutantmagnet

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrobass24
Apprently SuperTalent is working on a pcie based SSD that will use 8 of the indilix controllers, and provide Read/Writes 1.5/1.3gbs 1tb is supposed to come in under $1000, but I dont think we will see that for another 6months
That unit has my name on it. I saw it at an intro and it looks awesome, even has little hot swaps, haha

Ockie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ockie
That unit has my name on it. I saw it at an intro and it looks awesome, even has little hot swaps, haha
Yea I forgot about that....how cool is that?
When you need more space or want more speed just upgrade the internals of it.
Thats just awesome.

nitrobass24

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ockie
That unit has my name on it. I saw it at an intro and it looks awesome, even has little hot swaps, haha
It's called an Ockie?

Old Hippie

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
Go look up reviews on the VR 300 gig, and it wins almost across the board with every site, for a myriad of reasons. Again I am not talking about theoretical, or 1 month or 6 months from now. I am talking about today, right now. Feel free to post links to benchmarks where 1 or 2 $400 (in total cost) SDDs crush raptors, and better yet, a SSD with good capacity that crushes them, ie 120 or larger.

To the poster above, you just mentioned your buying your first SDD in October, which pretty much validates what I said, which is ironically hypocritical if you don't see the point of getting a VR now. Right now, is not the best time to get an SDD. If come October the prices (rumored to drop 50-80%), or optimizations get better, than I may agree with you. Until then, VR's still is the best choice for today. 4 months is a long time, and Windows 7 may bring the optimizations that I need.
What the heck? Learn to read before you call someone a hypocrite over something they've said. I also said that if I were buying new drives right now I'd absolutely go for an SSD, I don't own a VRaptor either... The only reason some reviews will still recommend a VRaptor is the price vs. size factor, a lot of people prefer to stick to a single drive for all their stuff (data and programs), etc. I'd love to see these mythical reviews you've seen where a VRaptor is still as fast as a good SSD performance-wise.

SSDs are faster now, they're just not the perfect solution for everyone if for some reason you're averse to using multiple drives, etc... Or if you simply can't afford them. In your case you spent just as much on the two Raptors as you would on a good 120GB+ SSD and you're using multiple other drives for backup/data anyway, so I don't see what difference it makes to have gone with the VRaptors.

P.S. If I were to get a SSD today I'd definitely be running Windows 7 RC as my main OS as well, which a lot of people here are doing. Truth be told, I'm putting it off 'till Oct. out of laziness as much as anything. I could afford the SSD right now, but I'd rather wait 'till Windows 7 is officially out since I'll be doing a fresh install then anyway and I just did one w/Vista a little while ago, save a lil' cash in the process. I'm testing 7 on a separate partition but not using it full time, for the same reason.

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Thanks for the replies - I found them all quite useful.

I suppose that a cautious way of looking at the general view on this forum, based on these replies, is that it is not a "bad" time to buy.

As for space, I have 2TB of space on my 2 HDD's and will keep them, so the limited storage space isn't a major issue as I'd use the SSD for the O/S and key applications (and maybe the occational game.)

On the performance front, perhaps for sustained write speeds, raided performance hard drives might win sometimes, but I'm more interested in overall performance including reads and random writes/reads and it looks like the general view is that SSD's have the performance advantage.

Already running Windows 7, although that's really because the Vista service pack 2 upgrade somehow killed my system and I had to reinstall (so might as well go Win 7).

Still not too keen on the price, but it has gone down a lot from a few months ago.

Anyway, after reading all this, and finding a discounted SSD on ebay, which was further discounted via my ebay vouchers, I pulled the trigger and am eagerly awaiting my Intel X25-M SSD.

echn111

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Awesome, be sure when you get it to check and make sure it's the latest firmware version, if not flash it before you do install anything on it. The old firmware had some long term performance degradation issues that the new firmware seems to have about eliminated.

Yoda4561

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Mitigated.~

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

i like butterfingers

gtg465x

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Hello, I'm not sure where this thread went, but I did end up buying an Intel X25-M. Everyone's feedback was useful, and I did end up reading a bit more about SSD's.

I fully agree that an SSD purchase does depend on situation. And the decision is not as clearcut from either the pro-SSD or pro-HDD perspective. SSD's are a relatively new consumer technology, many early adopters have been burnt (e.g. early jmicron related stuttering) and most pc users should stick to mature HDD technology.

Buying an SSD is still a risk - as a consumer technology, it is still not mature, and expensive. "But" I think the major limitations and risks are now understood and major companies are actively addressing them with firmware upgrades, O/S adjustments or new features, and price discounts. Some of the results are seen in the feedback on this board. No one is aware of any seriously exciting new breakthrough SSD products, so I see prices decreasing "gradually" rather than dramatically decreasing.

So the risks are a lot lower now, but still there - but it's my hard earned money to risk and my hobby. So thanks to the efforts of the "early adoptors" and feedback, I'm now far more confident I'm not buying either a significantly flawed technology, or a lemon of a product, when I go with the Intel X25-M today.

echn111

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impulse
Personally I think we've all got issues, it's what makes us human... However I think you're definitely wasting your time with all those quotes, that's a lot of copy/paste indeed brother (from within the same thread mind you).

All tech gets faster and all tech gets cheaper, if you're gonna suggest that an upgrade isn't worthwhile purely on that basis then no upgrade is ever worth it. I mean, nobody really needs the kind of power that i7 provides on a home system, at all... Yet a lot of people still upgrade to i7 knowing full well that i5 is around the corner and mobos will be half as cheap and processors will be cheaper.

It's the same deal for SSDs, only SSDs will improve system performance and responsiveness across the board... Whereas something like a processor upgrade isn't likely to do that for you unless you're upgrading from something relatively ancient. Between that and aznx's steps analogy I dunno how I could make it any clearer.

If you look at the performance benefit of a VRaptor objectively (versus the cost), it's like the complete opposite case. Nobody needs a HDD that's mildly faster for double or triple the cost! At 'least when you pay a premium for an SSD you're paying for something that's an order of magnitude faster and more tangible.
Fair point but I and anyone else that needs or wants more than 120 gigs on a single drive, isn't going to get that on an SSD right now. So I am holding out for a 256 or 512 drive thats costs $200. Which is my suggestion, the VR fit my budget and size requirement, when SSDs fit that then I will buy them. I never said OP should get a VR, the smart thing is to get a good 7k drive for now. I got the VR because I felt like it, and wanted a little extra oomph. Digging it so far.

As far as upgrades, read Sphinx quote, its really well worded, and exactly how I personally feel, but your welcome to disagree. I am not saying hold off forever, but theres definitely the argument that right now, is not the time to buy them. Which is all I have said this entire time. I never said VR's are better than SSDs. I said because the inevitable changes coming to SSDs soon, and price drops. Right now is not the time. If you need performance VR is the next step up from an HDD, if not a good regular 7k drive should suit you fine. Thats it, no more and no less. Again Read what Sphinx wrote, I couldn't have typed it better myself.

Sphinx, if your out there, chime in again, good stuff

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Personally I think we've all got issues, it's what makes us human... However I think you're definitely wasting your time with all those quotes, that's a lot of copy/paste indeed brother (from within the same thread mind you).

All tech gets faster and all tech gets cheaper, if you're gonna suggest that an upgrade isn't worthwhile purely on that basis then no upgrade is ever worth it. I mean, nobody really needs the kind of power that i7 provides on a home system, at all... Yet a lot of people still upgrade to i7 knowing full well that i5 is around the corner and mobos will be half as cheap and processors will be cheaper.

It's the same deal for SSDs, only SSDs will improve system performance and responsiveness across the board... Whereas something like a processor upgrade isn't likely to do that for you unless you're upgrading from something relatively ancient. Between that and aznx's steps analogy I dunno how I could make it any clearer.

If you look at the performance benefit of a VRaptor objectively (versus the cost), it's like the complete opposite case. Nobody needs a HDD that's mildly faster for double or triple the cost! At 'least when you pay a premium for an SSD you're paying for something that's an order of magnitude faster and more tangible.

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
Wow, no comment.

Read your post, You attack me 3 different times, and you wonder why I mentioned hypocracy, I mean you start the damn post with you got issues, no sir, you do. Its hilarious, and this conversation is no longer fruitful. AND AGAIN you use PERFORMANCE, NOT ONCE DO I MENTION PERFORMANCE, DAMN. When will you understand, I am not talking about straight up performance, I am talking about the total package, and the most important FACT, SSDs are going to lower in price, and get bigger soon, they have to! Average consumer looks at Size, not performance. And we have been living with HDDs forever, you do NOT NEED 200 Read/Write, unless your doing something server related thing, or working with large files period.

I am not putting the VR's on a pedestal, I only said for the space that I need, and performance, VR's are the best choice, and if you look at various posts, I am not alone. Maybe 120 gigs main drive is acceptabel for you, but its not for me. And anyone else that wants to run a simular set up, should get an HDD for now instead, and wait until both price and size on SSDs get bigger. How hard is that to get understand? I am going to unsubscribe to this thread soon, because I am wasting my time.

I am literally having an aim conversation on a forum with a SSD fanboy (aznx) and an Impulsive poster who can only back up his arguments by attacking someone. (no pun intended.) This isn't that big of a deal people, shessh.

Otherwise Thanks for the fun ride, but honestly now its getting annoying. Thanks OP for definitely posting on a hot topic. And I am glad I can be devil's advocate, as honestly no one has proved, 1) SDD's prices aren't going to drop in the short term, 2) that their capacities won't increase 3) A hard fact based need for 100 Read and Writes, ie why OP should need that performance premium right now. When the price is right, then it makes sense. Not one of you that keep posting vs me, have answered any of those questions. Also I will only READ objective responses, if you have a personal attack in there, then your an idiot, and I won't bother replying to you, even if you are correct and I am wrong.

Heres some good quotes from the topic.
If performance doesn't matter, why upgrade ever at all? It's not like you'll notice or care about the difference...

I'm sure you'd be a fanboy too of SSDs if you ever used a system that had a good one..

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by aznx
On a scale from 1 to 20..a VR isn't even a mid-step

1 would be a 7200 RPM 1TB WD Black
2 would be a VR
3 would be a 15K SAS drive
18 would be a Vertex
19 would be a X25-M
20 would be a X25-E

That's how different SSDs are..
Wow, no comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impulse
You've got issues pc1x1, we're expressing our opinion just as you are, our opinion is that VRaptors ('specially two in Raid 0) are no longer worth the price premium in light of falling SSD prices. $300-350 for a 120GB SSD is good enough for me even if it's substantially less storage than two VRaptors, I'm only putting the upgrade off out of laziness while waiting for W7. I wouldn't know why you need much more space for daily apps in general but that's just me.

Why do I think this? You've seen the numbers, we all have as you said, I think they're a much much bigger performance upgrade than VRaptors are. In fact, for day to day tasks ("real world" as you like to say) SSDs are the biggest upgrade anyone could make right now, more substantial than upgrading to an i7 even or adding more RAM (past 4GB). Having an SSD as the OS/app drive is that nice, and I say that after having played around with one for only a couple hours. Using a 10K RPM drive never gave me that feeling, not even close to it (though I did consider a VRaptor when they came out originally).

With the SSD everything feels snappier, opens faster, loads in less time (if you even see it loading), etc. The amount of time it saves throughout the day probably adds up very nicely. /shrug I'm not sure why you feel we're attacking you, no one's insulted you personally. If you think quoting you and stating a difference of opinion somehow amounts to an attack or persecution then you've spent your time online so far in a very sheltered state.

In any case, I've avoided quoting you now and tried answering some of your questions as to why I think VRaptors are not a sound investment, happy? aznx's analogy is probably a more blunt way of putting it. No one's compelling you to keep replying nor criminalizing your opinion though. I'm 27 btw... And I stopped dreaming about hardware a while ago, personally I think you've put the VRaptors on a pedestal for whatever strange reason.
Read your post, You attack me 3 different times, and you wonder why I mentioned hypocracy, I mean you start the damn post with you got issues, no sir, you do. Its hilarious, and this conversation is no longer fruitful. AND AGAIN you use PERFORMANCE, NOT ONCE DO I MENTION PERFORMANCE, DAMN. When will you understand, I am not talking about straight up performance, I am talking about the total package, and the most important FACT, SSDs are going to lower in price, and get bigger soon, they have to! Average consumer looks at Size, not performance. And we have been living with HDDs forever, you do NOT NEED 200 Read/Write, unless your doing something server related thing, or working with large files period.

I am not putting the VR's on a pedestal, I only said for the space that I need, and performance, VR's are the best choice, and if you look at various posts, I am not alone. Maybe 120 gigs main drive is acceptabel for you, but its not for me. And anyone else that wants to run a simular set up, should get an HDD for now instead, and wait until both price and size on SSDs get bigger. How hard is that to get understand? I am going to unsubscribe to this thread soon, because I am wasting my time.

I am literally having an aim conversation on a forum with a SSD fanboy (aznx) and an Impulsive poster who can only back up his arguments by attacking someone. (no pun intended.) This isn't that big of a deal people, shessh.

Otherwise Thanks for the fun ride, but honestly now its getting annoying. Thanks OP for definitely posting on a hot topic. And I am glad I can be devil's advocate, as honestly no one has proved, 1) SDD's prices aren't going to drop in the short term, 2) that their capacities won't increase 3) A hard fact based need for 100 Read and Writes, ie why OP should need that performance premium right now. When the price is right, then it makes sense. Not one of you that keep posting vs me, have answered any of those questions. Also I will only READ objective responses, if you have a personal attack in there, then your an idiot, and I won't bother replying to you, even if you are correct and I am wrong.

Heres some good quotes from the topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDon
QFT

Exactly, SSDs are so much faster than standard hard drives that even with some performance loss due to overwriting, they are still much better.

As with any cutting edge technology, whatever you buy now will be cheaper and better in 6 months. There is no way around that. And in 6 months after that, something cheaper and faster will again be available. You simply must decide your budget, and see if you can get something that will work for you at the time, and don't agonize over it after you make your decision. Buying cutting edge tech is worse than buying a new car.

You can maximise your future options by leaning towards bigger drives if you can afford them. That is the only regret I have about buying 4 X 30 gig OCZ solids 5 months ago. I should have gone with 3 X 60 gigs instead. Not a big deal, just something to consider.

Don
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galvin
Wouldn't be surprised if those are the prices. But a 1TB drive could replace my 2 harddrives now. But for that price is not even worth it. Doubt many will sell. Just think you spend $2000 this year, then one year later your purchase is now worth $1000. I'd be willing to spend $1000 on 1 terabyte, but not 2000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDon
People have gotten used to putting down a Ben and getting a terabyte drive. So when you gotta put down more than 2 to get "ONLY" 60 gigabytes, it can seem kinda pricey to most people.

Don't try and be logical and explain that 60 gig is plenty big enough for MOST peoples OS drive. Or that their performance will be vastly superior to the TB drive for the C note. Or that it is silent and uses less energy. The just get hung up on the price and the size.

Don
Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrobass24
The reason the sites dont reccomend ssd's over VR's is two-fold.
1) Space
2) Price

If those dont matter then SSD is the better choice.

I have both, and will never use a HDD for a boot/system drive ever agian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ockie
Space no longer is an issue, it's just cost. You can get 1tb ssd's now in 2.5" of space... it's just cost now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDon
QFT

PC1X1 Said:

Yes, if you feel that you need that much stuff on your fastest drive, then Vraptors are a better choice for you right now. But most apps do not really benefit from being on your fastest drive, so a hybrid approach would be a good choice for a lot of people. A 60 gig Vertex or 2 matched up to a WD 640 for bulk storage, for instance.

If you want to try and match hard drives and SSDs for space and price only, then HDs will seem like a good investment for a long time to come. But once you throw speed, particularly access time into the mix, then the choice becomes a lot closer.

Like nitrobass, after using SSDs for my OS drives, I will NEVER willingly go back to using a magnetic drives again. But I will continue to use magnetic drives for buk storage for the forseable future. I know, I need to update my sig.

Don
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoda4561
Yep, as long as you're satisfied with the performance of what you have now, there's no harm in waiting for SSD prices to inevitably drop. When my best friend was specc'ing out his first gaming PC build last month (he was a mac guy) I recommended against getting into SSD's for now. He's not exactly a techhead so for reliable "don't need to mess with it" performance normal hard drives are better for the time being. Best to ease him into PC's with more mature hardware. Next year I think will be a completely different story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocatello
As a charter member of the "cheap bastards club" (our motto: we are too cheap to use capital letters), I think that SSDs don't provide the right amount of performance for the price. They will have to get much cheaper before I buy any. Do I want some SSDs? Of course. But not at these prices.



Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
Also, keep in mind that JMicron is releasing a new controller very soon. Drives using this controller should be on the market within the next couple months, so you might want to wait until someone reviews one of these new drives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtg465x
STOP! Hammer time. 300GB VelociRaptor vs. Vertex

Price/GB
VRaptor - $0.67
Vertex - $2.95

Access Time
VRaptor - 6.8 ms
Vertex - 0.1 ms

Random Read
VRaptor - 0.55 MB/s
Vertex - 34.9 MB/s

Random Write
VRaptor - 1.63 MB/s
Vertex - 6.47 MB/s

Sequential Read
VRaptor - 118.0 MB/s
Vertex - 255.9 MB/s

Sequential Write
VRaptor - 118.9 MB/s
Vertex - 135.3 MB/s


Vertex 5 (4 by incredibly large margins), VRaptor 1 (price)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkStryke
Come this fall SSD's will be getting another shakeup, with JMicron hopefully shipping the arm 612, and new players in the nand market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Hippie
There'll never be an end to the GB/$/personal-acceptance-factor discussion.

Makes the whole thing much more interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinx99
If you cannot swing for a 128-GB model or thereabouts, I would hold off for another six months or so. The performance is fantastic, but the capacity is still a bit limited and I have a feeling that the 30GB and 60GB models of today, though very performant, are going to be tomorrow's disposable USB keys. I've had little issue filling up by 80GB Intel - just windows with all its winsxs crap has grown close to 20GB, add office apps, games (many of which are 10+GB these days with all that texturing) and the like and that space can feel a bit limited in very short order.

Obviously, if you have disposable income, this doesn't apply. I have the 80GB Intel in my laptop and a pair of 120GB Vertex drives on an i7 desktop, but I'm an enthusiast so I'm willing to pay more for what I acknowledge up front may feel like disposable crap in 12-18 months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinx99
To nitrobass and others expounding the "things always get better so might as well buy now" argument - you seem to be leaving out the very real world situation of disposable income and personal taste when it comes to dealing with disruptive tech. (This isn't a surprise, most people do; often the ones with enough of it.)

These are luxury items. Few of us "need" more than a 5400rpm disk - we merely "want" it

When you "need" something, you get it then and there.

When you "want" something, it's perfectly okay to study the trends, the peaks and valleys, to see exactly how much shelf life the item has, not because of its intrinsic properties, but because of how much you'll be tempted by the next great thing based upon certain trends.

I spend big on computer displays. I have found, over what is now 30 years of technology experience, that computer displays have a long, long shelf life. Barring failure, it's perfectly reasonable to expect 5 or more years out of a display--and generally not feel so tempted about getting the next best thing every six months. It makes the investment worth the while.

Up until recently, I spent big on hard disks as well. That 36GB raptor sure held up well... a solid 5 years. Some of those old fast 7200rpm 400GB sata disks also did well. But today? I'm not so sure. Hard disk performance has been relatively stable for a long time... slow incremental gain, similar to display tech, so you bought to match your capacity needs and would be fine. SSD has thrown all that out the window; it's one of the most disruptive new technologies of the last five years and that needs to be taken into consideration. There's really no target for what SSD performance and capacity will be like 12 months from now. We can at most guess, but whatever our guess is, it's likely to be dramatically different from today. So I know me well enough to know that as tempting as whatever I get may be today, I'm going to be tempted by its replacement 6 months from now. That's fine if you are made of money. It's a swan dive off a cliff if you're not, and if you're not good at managing your temptations. SSD offers a lot of that right now: so much temptation that we'll make any excuse we can to overlook any deficits so that we can justify getting one Right Now. Unfortunately that's not going to go away and "I need 80GB and 200MB/sec" will very quickly become "I need 512GB and 600MB/sec" and the drive you exhort others to purchase today you yourself are likely going to be regarding with some disdain nine months from now while reading pcper.com reviews of the latest and greatest.

I guess all I'm saying is to keep these other aspects of the equation in mind. The OP is asking a personal question and ultimately he or she has to determine what makes the most sense. We can at best list out the variables at play, and offer up some general guidelines, but when there's disruptive change, some people have to choose which side of the disruption makes most sense to them.

Just think about cars. Model is redesigned and new, superior vehicles hit the floor. Some people will be after the previous model year units fully expecting closeout discounts. Others will go to the same dealership expecting to pay MSRP for their latest and greatest model. Both will walk away feeling they got what they wanted. OP and indeed most of us are in a similar position, except the disruption will play out over a few years. At some point we have to make a personal decision about the "deal" of the old tech versus the "sexyness" of the new tech.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

You've got issues pc1x1, we're expressing our opinion just as you are, our opinion is that VRaptors ('specially two in Raid 0) are no longer worth the price premium in light of falling SSD prices. $300-350 for a 120GB SSD is good enough for me even if it's substantially less storage than two VRaptors, I'm only putting the upgrade off out of laziness while waiting for W7. I wouldn't know why you need much more space for daily apps in general but that's just me.

Why do I think this? You've seen the numbers, we all have as you said, I think they're a much much bigger performance upgrade than VRaptors are. In fact, for day to day tasks ("real world" as you like to say) SSDs are the biggest upgrade anyone could make right now, more substantial than upgrading to an i7 even or adding more RAM (past 4GB). Having an SSD as the OS/app drive is that nice, and I say that after having played around with one for only a couple hours. Using a 10K RPM drive never gave me 10c26 that feeling, not even close to it (though I did consider a VRaptor when they came out originally).

With the SSD everything feels snappier, opens faster, loads in less time (if you even see it loading), etc. The amount of time it saves throughout the day probably adds up very nicely. /shrug I'm not sure why you feel we're attacking you, no one's insulted you personally. If you think quoting you and stating a difference of opinion somehow amounts to an attack or persecution then you've spent your time online so far in a very sheltered state.

In any case, I've avoided quoting you now and tried answering some of your questions as to why I think VRaptors are not a sound investment, happy? aznx's analogy is probably a more blunt way of putting it. No one's compelling you to keep replying nor criminalizing your opinion though. I'm 27 btw... And I stopped dreaming about hardware a while ago, personally I think you've put the VRaptors on a pedestal for whatever strange reason.

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
1) Its a mid step number wise, higher performance than normal hdds, below SSD?
2) I respect your opinion, and will use it when I buy more HDDs/SSD in the next 6 months
3) I just started using the VRs, seem faster while doing work, but Ill know only in a month or so, I am currently building it, slowly but surely .

Also I am not rationalizing anything, I just stated I am happy with my purchase, because size wise its what I needed. And still your not really posting facts why SSD is better, or facts that it won't drop its price, etc,etc soon.

You never had a dream or goal? Thats what psychologically wanting something. I dunno how old you are, but I am 21, and its very satisfying to be able to buy stuff with my own money, and I can tell ya, alot of long hours heh! So I always wanted one, saved a bit of money and got em . Same way I am going to do when I get SSDs. But I know its alot of work, sweat so I value price alot.

And please don't quote me on a way, I have to keep responding to you, I said all I need to say. This thread isn't about me, so dunno why you guys have to keep targeting my personal reasons for getting VR's or judging my decision to get them, etc. Its not my thread, its OP wanting to know if buying HDD or SSD. And I love how one can't freely express his opinion without people being ignorant. I mean its apparently a crime to like HDDs more than SSD .

Instead of how you keep responding look at it this way. You disagree with me? Thats fine, how about posting. I disagree with PC1X1, and believe SSDs are better, because of this, this and this. No arguments needed. But honestly instead of just stating opinions, everyone just keeps saying the same crap. We know the numbers people, they are faster, thats not the argument, the argument is, should OP get SSDs now or later. I think Not, some think not as well. Some think yes, and me personally, I think VR's are the way to go if you need a performance solution now. If not get a Spinpoint or something.

Now please please please, make me stop replying to the same thing heh!
On a scale from 1 to 20..a VR isn't even a mid-step

1 would be a 7200 RPM 1TB WD Black
2 would be a VR
3 would be a 15K SAS drive
18 would be a Vertex
19 would be a X25-M
20 would be a X25-E

That's how different SSDs are..

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impulse
Again, I think you're just rationalizing your purchase (which implies you've already bought 'em...), and you admitted you haven't used a good SSD yourself so you can't comment on how much of a 'mid-step' it may or may not be... I'm not saying you blew away your money, the VRaptors aren't a bad product, but it wasn't a smart purchase as far as I'm concerned. SSDs are a substantial upgrade over either a VRaptor or a regular HDD, the VRaptor is much closer to a regular HDD than it is to the SSD in performance, while costing substantially more.

You have psychologically always wanted a raptor? What's that even mean?
1) Its a mid step number wise, higher performance than normal hdds, below SSD?
2) I respect your opinion, and will use it when I buy more HDDs/SSD in the next 6 months
3) I just started using the VRs, seem faster while doing work, but Ill know only in a month or so, I am currently building it, slowly but surely .

Also I am not rationalizing anything, I just stated I am happy with my purchase, because size wise its what I needed. And still your not really posting facts why SSD is better, or facts that it won't drop its price, etc,etc soon.

You never had a dream or goal? Thats what psychologically wanting something. I dunno how old you are, but I am 21, and its very satisfying to be able to buy stuff with my own money, and I can tell ya, alot of long hours heh! So I always wanted one, saved a bit of money and got em . Same way I am going to do when I get SSDs. But I know its alot of work, sweat so I value price alot.

And please don't quote me on a way, I have to keep responding to you, I said all I need to say. This thread isn't about me, so dunno why you guys have to keep targeting my personal reasons for getting VR's or judging my decision to get them, etc. Its not my thread, its OP wanting to know if buying HDD or SSD. And I love how one can't freely express his opinion without people being ignorant. I mean its apparently a crime to like HDDs more than SSD . Apparently having differences of opinion is now a crime.

Instead of how you keep responding look at it this way. You disagree with me? Thats fine, how about posting. I disagree with PC1X1, and believe SSDs are better, because of this, this and this. No arguments needed. But honestly instead of just stating opinions, everyone just keeps saying the same crap. We know the numbers people, they are faster, thats not the argument, the argument is, should OP get SSDs now or later. I think Not Now, some think not now as well. Some think yes, and me personally, I think VR's are the way to go if you need a performance solution now and are not doing server or movie work and need space, which VRs should be more than enough or actual work, not benches but should wait for SSDs to get more mature and cheaper. If performance isn't as important than get a Spinpoint or something.

Now please please please, make me stop replying to the same thing heh!

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

You know, I bought my 300Gb Velociraptors pretty close to when they came out. Before all of this SSD hooplah. If I had to buy them right now..............it WOULD be a tough decision. However, I will say that having them sitting in my machine leaves me in the enviable position of sitting around for a bit while all of you early adopters shake out this SSD wave for me. GO EARLY ADOPTERS...............GO!!!!

Then when price, performance and capacity reach that magic number, I'll reach into the old wallet and get me an SSD. By that time, it also won't be a technology that I have to go to the forums to figure out that theres 10 things I need to do to make them work right.

I don't say that 300Gb VR's are better than SSD's, that would be stupid, but if you happen to already have them, you can afford to wait. Your not suffering that much. Plus like somebody else said earlier, if your using Vista or the Win7 RC, most everything on the desktop opens instantaniously anyway..............how much more instantaniously do you need. You are missing out on boot up time and game load times I guess. Some of the movie and sound enthusiasts doing a lot of whatever it is that they do could see benefit I guess. But if your rig is mainly a game rig with some por..ahem--web surfing thrown in....................better times in the SSD world are coming fast.
This is all of course imho and only applies to me. Take from my thoughts what you will.

wrangler

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
I just personally choose the VR's, because I always wanted one (psycological), and wanted to see the "difference". Haven't regretted my purchase yet, although they were a bit pricey...

And I disagree with your opinion that the Vertex is better option than VR's. But I do respect the fact your entitled to it.

And seen the reviews, on SSD, and they seem to follow the same logic that its not the best time per say to get them, but Ill hold my judgment for SSD's until I own them later this year. But my opinion stands, HDD > SSD for now, and if you are in a simular situation as myself, I think VR's are worth a shot. Thats all
Again, I think you're just rationalizing your purchase (which implies you've already bought 'em...), and you admitted you haven't used a good SSD yourself so you can't comment on how much of a 'mid-step' it may or may not be... I'm not saying you blew away your money, the VRaptors aren't a bad product, but it wasn't a smart purchase as far as I'm concerned. SSDs are a substantial upgrade over either a VRaptor or a regular HDD, the VRaptor is much closer to a regular HDD than it is to the SSD in performance, while costing substantially more.

You have psychologically always wanted a raptor? What's that even mean?

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impulse
Nah, I'm pretty sure he's just trying to justify why he went with VRaptors instead of an SSD or even regular HDDs 'till he was able to afford an SSD (or 'till he felt comfortable investing in one)... Even though he probably knows he would be better off with the SSDs.

I could almost see his argument (he likes to keep some data and apps on the same drive, or far too many games/apps on the OS drive), but he invested in TWO VRaptors, which pretty much blows most of the price/performance/size arguments out of the water. For the price of the two VRaptors he could have easily gone with a smaller Vertex, he has multiple other drives for data and backups anyway, so what difference does it make if he keeps even more of his data and secondary apps off the OS drive and on the other larger/slower HDD drives?

I don't think there's anything wrong with recommending or at 'least suggesting that someone wait on imminent price drops on SSDs... I'll give him that. I think it's irrisponsible to even suggest a VRaptor as an option in the same breath though, because the performance gained from them (for the money) is far far less than what you'd get from an SSD. If you wanna save cash then get a WD640GB drive for $70, not a 300GB Raptor for $170.

The difference between those two drives will be far less noticeable than the difference between either of those two and an SSD, that migh be the one thing pc1x1 doesn't quite grasp in his effort to rationalize his purchase.
Actually I am not rationalizing my purchase I already bought them, last week or so actually, I don't get kick backs if you buy VR's lol. Anyhow I said to me the VR's made more sense, and if you want that extra performance, I'd get them, its a mid step, from SSDs and to HDDs. Its not the BEST option either. The best is getting 2-3x Samsung Spinpoints, or something simular, and raid 0 them, in price/performance wise, then waiting. I just personally choose the VR's, because I always wanted one (psycological), and wanted to see the "difference". Haven't regretted my purchase yet, although they were a bit pricey. I have 6 HDDs. All of them performace drives, but I wanted something a little faster, even coming off two WD' dual platter 640's Caviars, so I opted for them, because of aforementioned reasons. But it certainly isn't for everyone. And I disagree with your opinion that the Vertex is better option than VR's. But I do respect the fact your entitled to it.

And seen the reviews, on SSD, and they seem to follow the same logic that its not the best time per say to get them, but Ill hold my judgment for SSD's until I own them later this year. But my opinion stands, HDD > SSD for now, and if you are in a simular situation as myself, I think VR's are worth a shot. Thats all

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by aznx
pc1x1 tries to imply that his 1 or 2 VRs = 1 Vertex/Intel in the real world...which is basically saying SSDs aren't better even for home desktop use, which is false..
Nah, I'm pretty sure he's just trying to justify why he went with VRaptors instead of an SSD or even regular HDDs 'till he was able to afford an SSD (or 'till he felt comfortable investing in one)... Even though he probably knows he would be better off with the SSDs.

I could almost see his argument (he likes to keep some data and apps on the same drive, or far too many games/apps on the OS drive), but he invested in TWO VRaptors, which pretty much blows most of the price/performance/size arguments out of the water. For the price of the two VRaptors he could have easily gone with a smaller Vertex, he has multiple other drives for data and backups anyway, so what difference does it make if he keeps even more of his data and secondary apps off the OS drive and on the other larger/slower HDD drives?

I don't think there's anything wrong with recommending or at 'least suggesting that someone wait on imminent price drops on SSDs... I'll give him that. I think it's irrisponsible to even suggest a VRaptor as an option in the same breath though, because the performance gained from them (for the money) is far far less than what you'd get from an SSD. If you wanna save cash then get a WD640GB drive for $70, not a 300GB Raptor for $170.

The difference between those two drives will be far less noticeable than the difference between either of those two and an SSD, that migh be the one thing pc1x1 doesn't quite grasp in his effort to rationalize his purchase.

Impulse

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

If you cannot swing for a 128-GB model or thereabouts, I would hold off for another six months or so. The performance is fantastic, but the capacity is still a bit limited and I have a feeling that the 30GB and 60GB models of today, though very performant, are going to be tomorrow's disposable USB keys. I've had little issue filling up by 80GB Intel - just windows with all its winsxs crap has grown close to 20GB, add office apps, games (many of which are 10+GB these days with all that texturing) and the like and that space can feel a bit limited in very short order.

Obviously, if you have disposable income, this doesn't apply. I have the 80GB Intel in my laptop and a pair of 120GB Vertex drives on an i7 desktop, but I'm an enthusiast so I'm willing to pay more for what I acknowledge up front may feel like disposable crap in 12-18 months.

sphinx99

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

To nitrobass and others expounding the "things always get better so might as well buy now" argument - you seem to be leaving out the very real world situation of disposable income and personal taste when it comes to dealing with disruptive tech. (This isn't a surprise, most people do; often the ones with enough of it.)

These are luxury items. Few of us "need" more than a 5400rpm disk - we merely "want" it

When you "need" something, you get it then and there.

When you "want" something, it's perfectly okay to study the trends, the peaks and valleys, to see exactly how much shelf life the item has, not because of its intrinsic properties, but because of how much you'll be tempted by the next great thing based upon certain trends.

I spend big on computer displays. I have found, over what is now 30 years of technology experience, that computer displays have a long, long shelf life. Barring failure, it's perfectly reasonable to expect 5 or more years out of a display--and generally not feel so tempted about getting the next best thing every six months. It makes the investment worth the while.

Up until recently, I spent big on hard disks as well. That 36GB raptor sure held up well... a solid 5 years. Some of those old fast 7200rpm 400GB sata disks also did well. But today? I'm not so sure. Hard disk performance has been relatively stable for a long time... slow incremental gain, similar to display tech, so you bought to match your capacity needs and would be fine. SSD has thrown all that out the window; it's one of the most disruptive new technologies of the last five years and that needs to be taken into consideration. There's really no target for what SSD performance and capacity will be like 12 months from now. We can at most guess, but whatever our guess is, it's likely to be dramatically different from today. So I know me well enough to know that as tempting as whatever I get may be today, I'm going to be tempted by its replacement 6 months from now. That's fine if you are made of money. It's a swan dive off a cliff if you're not, and if you're not good at managing your temptations. SSD offers a lot of that right now: so much temptation that we'll make any excuse we can to overlook any deficits so that we can justify getting one Right Now. Unfortunately that's not going to go away and "I need 80GB and 200MB/sec" will very quickly become "I need 512GB and 600MB/sec" and the drive you exhort others to purchase today you yourself are likely going to be regarding with some disdain nine months from now while reading pcper.com reviews of the latest and greatest.

I guess all I'm saying is to keep these other aspects of the equation in mind. The OP is asking a personal question and ultimately he or she has to determine what makes the most sense. We can at best list out the variables at play, and offer up some general guidelines, but when there's disruptive change, some people have to choose which side of the disruption makes most sense to them.

Just think about cars. Model is redesigned and new, superior vehicles hit the floor. Some people will be after the previous model year units fully expecting closeout discounts. Others will go to the same dealership expecting to pay MSRP for their latest and greatest model. Both will walk away feeling they got what they wanted. OP and indeed most of us are in a similar position, except the disruption will play out over a few years. At some point we have to make a personal decision about the "deal" of the old tech versus the "sexyness" of the new tech.

sphinx99

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinx99
To nitrobass and others expounding the "things always get better so might as well buy now" argument - you seem to be leaving out the very real world situation of disposable income and personal taste when it comes to dealing with disruptive tech. (This isn't a surprise, most people do; often the ones with enough of it.)

These are luxury items. Few of us "need" more than a 5400rpm disk - we merely "want" it

When you "need" something, you get it then and there.

When you "want" something, it's perfectly okay to study the trends, the peaks and valleys, to see exactly how much shelf life the item has, not because of its intrinsic properties, but because of how much you'll be tempted by the next great thing based upon certain trends.

I spend big on computer displays. I have found, over what is now 30 years of technology experience, that computer displays have a long, long shelf life. Barring failure, it's perfectly reasonable to expect 5 or more years out of a display--and generally not feel so tempted about getting the next best thing every six months. It makes the investment worth the while.

Up until recently, I spent big on hard disks as well. That 36GB raptor sure held up well... a solid 5 years. Some of those old fast 7200rpm 400GB sata disks also did well. But today? I'm not so sure. Hard disk performance has been relatively stable for a long time... slow incremental gain, similar to display tech, so you bought to match your capacity needs and would be fine. SSD has thrown all that out the window; it's one of the most disruptive new technologies of the last five years and that needs to be taken into consideration. There's really no target for what SSD performance and capacity will be like 12 months from now. We can at most guess, but whatever our guess is, it's likely to be dramatically different from today. So I know me well enough to know that as tempting as whatever I get may be today, I'm going to be tempted by its replacement 6 months from now. That's fine if you are made of money. It's a swan dive off a cliff if you're not, and if you're not good at managing your temptations. SSD offers a lot of that right now: so much temptation that we'll make any excuse we can to overlook any deficits so that we can justify getting one Right Now. Unfortunately that's not going to go away and "I need 80GB and 200MB/sec" will very quickly become "I need 512GB and 600MB/sec" and the drive you exhort others to purchase today you yourself are likely going to be regarding with some disdain nine months from now while reading pcper.com reviews of the latest and greatest.

I guess all I'm saying is to keep these other aspects of the equation in mind. The OP is asking a personal question and ultimately he or she has to determine what makes the most sense. We can at best list out the variables at play, and offer up some general guidelines, but when there's disruptive change, some people have to choose which side of the disruption makes most sense to them.

Just think about cars. Model is redesigned and new, superior vehicles hit the floor. Some people will be after the previous model year units fully expecting closeout discounts. Others will go to the same dealership expecting to pay MSRP for their latest and greatest model. Both will walk away feeling they got what they wanted. OP and indeed most of us are in a similar position, except the disruption will play out over a few years. At some point we have to make a personal decision about the "deal" of the old tech versus the "sexyness" of the new tech.
Having a good SSD is like having a car that can produce all its power and torque at ALL RPMs. aka kinda like the electric cars and their engines..

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinx99
To nitrobass and others expounding the "things always get better so might as well buy now" argument - you seem to be leaving out the very real world situation of disposable income and personal taste when it comes to dealing with disruptive tech. (This isn't a surprise, most people do; often the ones with enough of it.)

These are luxury items. Few of us "need" more than a 5400rpm disk - we merely "want" it

When you "need" something, you get it then and there.

When you "want" something, it's perfectly okay to study the trends, the peaks and valleys, to see exactly how much shelf life the item has, not because of its intrinsic properties, but because of how much you'll be tempted by the next great thing based upon certain trends.

I spend big on computer displays. I have found, over what is now 30 years of technology experience, that computer displays have a long, long shelf life. Barring failure, it's perfectly reasonable to expect 5 or more years out of a display--and generally not feel so tempted about getting the next best thing every six months. It makes the investment worth the while.

Up until recently, I spent big on hard disks as well. That 36GB raptor sure held up well... a solid 5 years. Some of those old fast 7200rpm 400GB sata disks also did well. But today? I'm not so sure. Hard disk performance has been relatively stable for a long time... slow incremental gain, similar to display tech, so you bought to match your capacity needs and would be fine. SSD has thrown all that out the window; it's one of the most disruptive new technologies of the last five years and that needs to be taken into consideration. There's really no target for what SSD performance and capacity will be like 12 months from now. We can at most guess, but whatever our guess is, it's likely to be dramatically different from today. So I know me well enough to know that as tempting as whatever I get may be today, I'm going to be tempted by its replacement 6 months from now. That's fine if you are made of money. It's a swan dive off a cliff if you're not, and if you're not good at managing your temptations. SSD offers a lot of that right now: so much temptation that we'll make any excuse we can to overlook any deficits so that we can justify getting one Right Now. Unfortunately that's not going to go away and "I need 80GB and 200MB/sec" will very quickly become "I need 512GB and 600MB/sec" and the drive you exhort others to purchase today you yourself are likely going to be regarding with some disdain nine months from now while reading pcper.com reviews of the latest and greatest.

I guess all I'm saying is to keep these other aspects of the equation in mind. The OP is asking a personal question and ultimately he or she has to determine what makes the most sense. We can at best list out the variables at play, and offer up some general guidelines, but when there's disruptive change, some people have to choose which side of the disruption makes most sense to them.

Just think about cars. Model is redesigned and new, superior vehicles hit the floor. Some people will be after the previous model year units fully expecting closeout discounts. Others will go to the same dealership expecting to pay MSRP for their latest and greatest model. Both will walk away feeling they got what they wanted. OP and indeed most of us are in a similar position, except the disruption will play out over a few years. At some point we have to make a personal decision about the "deal" of the old tech versus the "sexyness" of the new tech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aznx
Having a good SSD is like having a car that can produce all its power and torque at ALL RPMs. aka kinda like the electric cars and their engines..
Your still missing the point .

Spinx summarized one of my points perfectly. Very nice + props

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
I specifically mentioned my experience with VR's, and said multiple times, I don't own SSD's, but go read upcoming news, etc. Its all there. Also HDD's last a long time too, guess what? We been using them for the last 20 years without any problems that would cause them unviable, theres quirks sure. SSD's have their own problems too. Again your another one that misses the point, I haven't once said HDD's are better than SSDs etc. I said the timing to buy one is off, learn to read. And learn to answer questions, because thats what OP ASKED!

Also who are you to judge or tell me how many gigs my programs should use? And yea I do use that, why would I make up an arbitrary number, and yea obviously its a rounded figure.

Really why do you people feel the need to defend a technology, whats with the fanboyism, why can't you be objective? Instead of attacking me, and looking like an idiot, why not provide facts? Honestly the one that discussed with me that I actually listened, was gtg465x, and actually he came off as rude in the beginning, but I noticed he originally thought I was saying VR's were faster etc, which isn't the case. Anyhow its always fun to argue on the interwebs, though its not fun, since theres no argument here at all, just baseless attacks now.

I did like this thread for the fact, it made me give a second look to SDDs. But facts are still there, prices are coming down, and capacity going up, and any hybrid approuch will need a HDD. So the senseable thing is to get HDD's now, since they most likely won't drop to much more in price, then later on get SDDs, for all their benefits.

Not once did I say SSD's aren't better, so I find your fanboyism funny. All the people that were actually contributing, aren't speaking here anymore, so this thread is becoming useless and redundant.

I am all ears in someone can prove buying an SSD right now, with cold hard facts is better than buying a HDD. I can easily buy SDD's right now even. I am not convinced. And keep your mindless personal attacks to yourself or Ill start reporting you, Ill keep your post up for now, just to show your ignorance.

TTYL! and night, I am quite tired now, and probably more incoherent haha.
Read up on what random read benchmarks represent as well as IOPS combined with access times then read the following reviews...

Maybe then you'll understand why everyone recommends SSDs over VRs for the money..

You can't really describe real world use through numbers..

http://www.guru3d.com/article/ocz-ve...b-ssd-review/1
http://barefeats.com/hard118.html
http://barefeats.com/mbpp13.html
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=670&type=expert
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...=318&Itemid=60
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/954/1/
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/sto...x-ssd-review/1
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Four...Talent/?page=1
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews....d=776&pageid=1

aznx

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by aznx
Also the current SSDs are one of those "outstanding" products that'll last you a long time. How can you have an opinion on something you've never experienced? I'd gander it's called BSing..

300gbs of what programs? Do you use every single one of them everyday? How much space do you think your everyday programs would take up? Surely not 300gbs..I'm betting there is a lot of bloat there, or you're exaggerating a whole lot..
I specifically mentioned my experience with VR's, and said multiple times, I don't own SSD's, but go read upcoming news, etc. Its all there. Also HDD's last a long time too, guess what? We been using them for the last 20 years without any problems that would cause them unviable, theres quirks sure. SSD's have their own problems too. Again your another one that misses the point, I haven't once said HDD's are better than SSDs etc. I said the timing to buy one is off, learn to read. And learn to answer questions, because thats what OP ASKED!

Also who are you to judge or tell me how many gigs my programs should use? And yea I do use that, why would I make up an arbitrary number, and yea obviously its a rounded figure.

Really why do you people feel the need to defend a technology, whats with the fanboyism, why can't you be objective? Instead of attacking me, and looking like an idiot, why not provide facts? Honestly the one that discussed with me that I actually listened, was gtg465x, and actually he came off as rude in the beginning, but I noticed he originally thought I was saying VR's were faster etc, which isn't the case. Anyhow its always fun to argue on the interwebs, though its not fun, since theres no argument here at all, just baseless attacks now.

I did like this thread for the fact, it made me give a second look to SDDs. But facts are still there, prices are coming down, and capacity going up, and any hybrid approuch will need a HDD. So the senseable thing is to get HDD's now, since they most likely won't drop to much more in price, then later on get SDDs, for all their benefits.

Not once did I say SSD's aren't better, so I find your fanboyism funny. All the people that were actually contributing, aren't speaking here anymore, so this thread is becoming useless and redundant.

I am all ears in someone can prove buying an SSD right now, with cold hard facts is better than buying a HDD. I can easily buy SDD's right now even. I am not convinced. And keep your mindless personal attacks to yourself or Ill start reporting you, Ill keep your post up for now, just to show your ignorance.

TTYL! and night, I am quite tired now, and probably more incoherent haha.

pc1x1

Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by pc1x1
I am done with trying to explain it to you. Of course everything will get better, but all reports point to costs decreasing on SSD's etc.

Also even waiting 30 seconds for outlook, thats not really a big deal. You aren't going to die because you waited a few seconds. Thats what I am talking about in real world. Most benefits will be seconds, and if that.

Are SSDs better, yes, they are, but OP would be better served IMO if he waited, for price, and capacity to increase.

Meanwhile to answer his own question, he should get a normal HDD, wait those 30 seconds, and then in 6 months to a year get much better SSD's.

Tech will always get better, but sometimes theres outstanding products that are so good they last longer. ala 9800 pro, 8800 GTX, etc. I am not going to argue on what could be or what will be, I maybe right or you may be. But theres plently of precedents, Tech comes in way to expensive, then drastically goes down.

SSDs are bound to drastically go down. Again I never said the performance isn't there, it is, and it actually isn't needed, seconds aren't going to kill anyone! But once price is right, then getting back those seconds makes sense for nornal computing. If you work with Gigantic files, then by all means get it. Thats my whole argument, I never once said SSDs are faster, better etc. Hell I hope they are, the benefits they bring will finally help what has been the slowest part in the computer for ages, but for these current capacities, and price, theres no point. I highly doubt any of us, myself included actually NEED this speed. We certainly want it, but we don't need it per say. And before you go on a tanget I am not saying we don't need to progress, all I am saying is for the current market and price, OP is better served getting proven, mature and most importantly cheaper tech, ala HDD's, and then when prices hit mainstream, upgrade.

You could even use the HDDs op buys today, as his data drive in the future, should he need the space, when he upgrades to SSD.

I am done repeating myself, thanks!

And just as a precaution, if OP doesn't use alot of space, then he can get SSDs if he chooses, like I mentioned I have 300 gigs just on programs, and OS, no data, so I need the space, and I like OS and programs on the same drive, so VR's make sense for me. However since just 2 weeks ago, I was in the same position as OP, SSDs or VR's. It seems more sensible to go for VR's but I am honestly tired of trying to defend an opinion, its ridicolous, that you keep fragmenting my quotes, and worse yet trying state MY opinion is wrong, its hilarious.

Copy and paste Ockie's sig after 2 cents, .... yeah exactly.

I mean comon gtg465x after putting together my quotes understood what I meant on my posts. See if you can do the same. Sighs....

Ok I am done now
Also the current SSDs are one of those "outstanding" products that'll last you a long time. How can you have an opinion on something you've never experienced? I'd gander it's called BSing..

300gbs of what programs? Do you use every single one of them everyday? How much space do you think your everyday programs would take up? Surely not 300gbs..I'm betting there is a lot of bloat there, or you're exaggerating a whole lot..

aznx

Previous Question:  Windows 7 tweaks for SSDs  [H]ard|Forum  Data Storage SystemsNext Question:  Why does RAID make hard drive run faster  [H]ard|Forum  Data Storage Systems

- Source: Any signifcant SSD changes imminent Good time to buy [H]ard|Forum Data Storage Systems
- Previous Question: Windows 7 tweaks for SSDs [H]ard|Forum Data Storage Systems
- Next Question: Why does RAID make hard drive run faster [H]ard|Forum Data Storage Systems